Those are front page stories on the mobile editions of the Post and the Times. I suppose this kind of shit gets clicks or sells papers, but from what I’ve seen over the years, those papers’ editors like to climb into the three wheeled clown car heading to Stupidtown whenever any member of the vestigial inbred Windsor clan celebrates a milestone birthday, an anniversary or, Tebow help us, a wedding.
Virginia Highlander
It’s difficult to imagine a more pointless bunch of potatoheads than the House of Windsor.
Keith G
With all respect, I really am amazed at how many time on this blog FPers get all bent over stuff that has been put up just to maximize clicks. I know it is appealing to blame stupidity of some nefarious intent, but isn’t mainly about showing advertisers that a given site can attract a constant stream of hits.
In this case, this is the Queen’s weekend. Get her on a few more pages and get >X amount of more clicks.
An edit:
Have you been following American politics?
HRA
Personally, I do wonder if it would be better to have a monarch when I consider the swill and nastiness we are being subjected to in a lead to this upcoming presidential election.
Of course, my days under the flag of the Windsors was only my younger childhood and it was one of happiness to me.
When my parents brought me to the US as a preteen, I became very interested in government and politics. I still have an interest although I have to admit some of the sparkle has tarnished quite a bit this time around.
Keith
Which reminds me, Lindsey Graham has been conspicously absent in the news the last month or two. What gives?
mistermix
@Keith G:
Hmm, maybe you’re not getting the whole premise of this blog…
geg6
Fuck this old useless, inbred hag and all her progeny. Talk about parasites, these people make parasites look like pikers. I simply do not understand why any American would give a shit about anything these idiots do. This country wouldn’t even exist if the founders didn’t tell a British monarch to go get fucked. Why that isn’t a permanent American value boggles my mind.
Rafer Janders
I will say this, I think America is missing out by not having separated the offices of head of state and head of government. Too often (especially in the Bush years) proper respect for the office of the presidency gets distorted into demanding respect for the president as a man. The fact that we don’t have a monarch has, paradoxically, led to the presidency assuming ever more monarchical trappings, since humans seem designed to want someone at the top.
Doesn’t mean you have to have a king or queen, but we would have done better to have a system more like they have in, say, France, Germany or Israel, where the ceremonial office of head of state is held by a different person than the political office of head of government.
PeakVT
Having newspaper “sections”, which allowed idiotic stories to be headlined discretely in Style or Entertainment or Life without polluting the front page, is one of the things I truly miss about reading a dead tree paper
Soonergrunt
@geg6: I’ll just forgo the multi-paragraph treatise on the American view of royalty and how much better off we are for not having a monarch, and the evils of a society that (like Britain) does have one, and a society (like the US) that is slowly concentrating political and economic power in an elite class and a small clan of families, and I’ll just say:
THIS.
MB
The Post’s piece is actually amusing. In response to the question, Adrian Higgins explains that Britons get “Leaders who don’t have to talk to Barbara Walters. Leaders who don’t have to look as if they are enjoying themselves in public.”
NotMax
Understand that the BBC America channel is showing (likely ad nauseum) a special on the Diamond jubilee.
Interesting tidbit is that they dug up and included film footage of Victoria’s Diamond jubilee to include in the show.
Rick Massimo
We DO have a Queen, sometimes.
It’s the First Lady – when a Republican is president.
NotMax
@Rick Massimo
Take it that you weren’t around when JFK and Jackie were at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Rosalita
We had King George II, he was a huge embarrassment
cathyx
With all the executive power grabbing going on, we just may have a King soon.
Culture of Truth
Sure they’re wacky, but at least they have an interesting history, and appear now to be mostly harmless.
QEII seems to have more dignity than, say, the Kardashians.
MattF
The traditional reactionary threesome is monarchy, army and church, and we’ve only got two out of three. Boo hoo.
Culture of Truth
Inbred, maybe. Would a King Charles have been any worse than a Tony Blair or David Cameron?
Baud
I’m surprised no one has mentioned Tunch yet.
Egg Berry
According to TBogg, Jonah Goldberg doesn’t think 18-year-olds should be allowed to vote because they’re too stupid. Here’s a quote that should go down in history:
I realize this is a bit off topic, but it fits, if you squint hard enough.
Omnes Omnibus
Having been raised here in the US, I have an automatic rebellion against the idea that someone is better than me by birth rather than talent or character. Okay, I will also confess that I have an automatic rebellion against the idea that someone is better than me due to talent of character as well.
That being said, @geg6:
This seems an awfully strong reaction against people who have likely done nothing to you personally.
@Rafer Janders: Head of state and head of government in the same person does seem to create some problems, doesn’t it?
@Rick Massimo: The British queen and other queens regnant throughout the world are different than first ladies. They are actually heads of state.
Omnes Omnibus
@cathyx: Oh, for fuck’s sake.
Linda Featheringill
@Egg Berry:
I don’t think that 18-year-olds should be soldiers, for the same reasons.
Omnes Omnibus
@Linda Featheringill: Where would you draw the line? Legal responsibility for debts? Trial as an adult? How old is old enough? 21? 25? 30?
Egg Berry
@Omnes Omnibus: Maybe we should ask twice-Nobel-nominated scientist Jonah Goldberg?
Sentient Puddle
Headlines phrased in the form of the question should always set off your BS detector. They suggest that the article could be about multiple things, which is bad form. Headlines are not supposed to be ambiguous like that.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
The only thing that kept us from having a king was George Washington declining the post. We’re lucky that in the late 1700’s so many people were gathered in one place that actually wanted to take responsibility for their own decisions. It’s been on the decline ever since then.
Soonergrunt
@Culture of Truth:
So does the Spongebob Squarepants wall paper in my nephew’s room. That’s not exactly a difficult hurdle to clear.
Omnes Omnibus
@Egg Berry: Do we have to? Linda may be wrong on the issue, but she is a thoughtful person who makes the decent point that if you can be asked to fight, you are old enough to make decisions about who is sending you to fight. No such judgment can be made about almost-Pultitzer-nominee Jonah Goldberg. Hell, I feel like apologizing to Linda for mentioning her in the same paragraph as the middle-school-science-fair-participant Goldberg.
Egg Berry
@Omnes Omnibus: Sir, I will not have you insult middle-school-science-fair participants like that!
Although, the same argument could be made with regard to drinking laws. Why should 18-year-olds be allowed to fight and die but not legally purchase alcohol?
Also, it is telling that Goldblob doesn’t show his work with that statement.
ornery_curmudgeon
Silly media, trying to manipulate peasants into wanting a king. Haha! We all know that empires have Emperors.
I know we are an empire because the media said it was so. And then, my fellow citizens nodded along, and then, it was so.
Omnes Omnibus
@Egg Berry: From my time in the army, I seem to remember that 18 year olds were able to buy and drink alcohol on base.
Steeplejack
@Keith G:
Or the Kardashians. Or Jersey Shore. Or The Real Housewives of Wherever. American royalty in the idiocracy.
Villago Delenda Est
@Omnes Omnibus:
That was in Europe.
Unfortunately, at Fort Lewis, they were not allowed to, because the base conformed with local law.
Which upset troops who had spent a tour in Germany then came back to discover they could not buy a beer on base.
If you’re old enough to die for your country, you should be able to vote, and to drink a damn beer. Or scotch, for that matter…
On topic: PLEASE. It is the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. “Windsor” was the name change during WWI when it was felt that having German monarchs (which has been true since George I, some 300 years ago) was just not politically correct for an empire that was at war with the Hun.
Amir Khalid
Mock the House of Windsor all you want for being reduced from lords of their realm to a troupe of mere professional celebrities, more dignified than the Kardashians but not much wore worthy. But unlike the American upper class, the Windsor men have never shirked military service. Prince Harry, remember, kicked up a fuss when the MoD considered not sending him to Afghanistan with his unit. So it’s a bit harsh to label them a bunch of worthless dicks.
As celebrities, they do help generate worldwide interest and goodwill for Britain, plus they have the head-of-state protocol stuff down cold. The Queen’s 60-year Jubilee is a big tourist attraction this year alongside the Olympics. All of which far outweighs the occasional embarrassment that becomes gossip-rag fodder.
I wouldn’t call the Windsors a total waste. In fact, I think Britain gets pretty good value out of them. It could be a lot worse. Malaysia has less than half Britain’s population, but we’re stuck with nine royal houses.
Mustang Bobby
As long as we have American Idol, we’ll always have queens.
Rafer Janders
@Soonergrunt:
And let’s remember, it’s monarchical Britain which has greater class mobility and less income inequality than supposedly egalitarian America.
MattF
@Villago Delenda Est: In fact, the English have avoided native monarchial families since, um, Elizabeth I. Or since 1066, if you want to go ‘way back. Norman, Scottish, Dutch, German– but not native Angles or Saxons.
Rick Massimo
@NotMax: You’re right, although I did read about them. I’m only 47, after all.
Villago Delenda Est
@Omnes Omnibus:
In Jonah Goldberg’s case, five years after he’s dead.
Rafer Janders
@Amir Khalid:
Very good point. We’re stuck with the noblesse, but without the oblige.
Svensker
Hey, as a new resident of Canuckistan who’s looking at swearing allegiance to the Queen (or someone wearing the crown) in a few years, I say they’re not so bad. Canadians seem to get a bang out of the whole thing and you get great bonuses, such as teacups with royal visages, etc. Prince Charles recently visited our local thrift (Christian mission dedicated to working with street people and doing a bang up job) and we were crushed that we’d missed it.
As an American it all seems kinda weird, but cute, too. Especially the teacups.
Villago Delenda Est
@Rafer Janders:
One need look no further than the vile Rmoney clan to see nobless without the oblige.
They are all tumbrel fodder, the sooner, the better.
Linda Featheringill
@Omnes Omnibus: #29
Thanks for the kind words, OO. :-)
Amir Khalid
@Svensker:
There’s a question they’ve been kicking around on Airstrip One for a while: Should the succession skip Charles and go straight to William? I wonder where you, as a (potential) subject of the British Crown, stand on this.
Egg Berry
As long as we’re talking English royalty, Jim Meskimen and a cast of thousands does Clarence’s speech from Richard III.
fasteddie9318
@Rafer Janders:
This. There’s a reason why, when we go around bombing nations into freedom, we then rebuild them under parliamentary systems rather than presidential systems. Our own government even knows that our system is fucked up and bullshit.
redshirt
@ornery_curmudgeon: Hells yeah! America is too awesome to be ruled by a mere King. We need a GRAND AND TERRIBLE EMPEROR!
Also, too, many more Star Destroyers, and a Death Star would be nice.
Evolving Deep Southerner
@Omnes Omnibus: George Zimmerman’s 28, and his lack of mature judgment was just used as an argument in court “excusing” his actions.
elm
@top: I think they misspelled Abcess.
Gian
every time the British royalty shows up on my TV news, or in the headlines of the paper, my first thought is “didn’t we fight a war to be free of those assholes?” starting sometime around april of 1775?
Villago Delenda Est
@Evolving Deep Southerner:
That was such a fucking joke.
But then again, Henry Hyde’s tryst with a married woman was a “youthful indiscretion”. This happened when Hyde was in his forties, mind you.
Canuckistani Tom
@Amir Khalid:
I say Charles should be next. But I doubt he’d be king for very long. AFAIK, Liz is in fine health. If she ties with the Queen Mum for lifepsan, Liz would be on the throne for another 15 yrs. Charles would then be 78 when he becomes king, and remember than women live longer than men.
Pen
@Amir Khalid: Considering Charles penchant for alt-med woo I sure hope so.
Rafer Janders
@Gian:
Well, we did fight it, and we won. The fact that they’re on the news doesn’t affect that, does it? We didn’t exactly fight the war to impose a news blackout on royalty, did we?
But let’s not pretend that we don’t have a system of nobility and inherited wealth and influence in this country. One which I think has grown far more pernicious than the British system, because in Britain there’s no pretense made that it’s due to anything but inheritance, whereas here we’re forced to pretend that those at the top have somehow earned it, and are thus better and more deserving people, rather than having been given their advantages by their parents (recall Ann Richards’ line that Bush was someone who was born on third base and thought he hit a triple).
At least in Britain everyone’s honest about what’s going on. I for one like my injustice unleavened by hypocrisy.
Chris
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
This. It’s the best thing about George Washington, IMHO. That guy could’ve been Napoleon if he’d wanted to, and our history would’ve been vastly different.
Brachiator
@Rafer Janders:
There are a lot of Brits who will dispute this assertion. And with the UK sinking into the austerity mire, things are getting much worse.
@MattF:
There ain’t nothing native about the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, who were all invaders from Germany that displaced Britons and Celts. England has always been a mongrel nation with pretenses of purity, which is the case for the whole freaking planet. But the Brits have a way of more or less folding the later waves of invaders into the national myth of being English. King Arthur was fighting the Saxon menace. Centuries later, Brits happily called themselves Anglo Saxons. But now look down on Essex (East Saxon) girls in pop culture. Go figure.
The royals have a connection to ancient English kings here and there. For example, they have some descent from the Tudors and also to the Welsh (proto British) nobility.
Ironically enough, some of the older English connections come to William from Diana.
Chris
@Rafer Janders:
Yep. It also still has a state church, but not nearly as many or as powerful theocratic zealots. Hell of a thing.
Brachiator
@Chris:
It may have also been fortuitous that Washington never had any children, especially sons. Otherwise, there may have been a stronger sentiment for a monarchy.
Washington may have had an exposure to smallpox or some other illness that rendered him sterile. His wife Martha had children from her previous marriage.
kerFuFFler
I think my favorite moment of the movie Amelie was when, after knocking at a door and realizing that the occupant was not the person she was looking for, she came up with the gambit of asking them if they wanted to sign a petition for the canonization of Lady Di. It was great how swiftly that brought their interaction to an end. But then, that was in France. I am always amazed at how many Americans are excited about the Royal family.
Lojasmo
@Egg Berry:
The age of consent should be the same for drinking alcohol and volunteering for the military. Somewhere around sixty seems about right.
Brachiator
@geg6:
But, but. If we didn’t have the Brits, we wouldn’t have Masterpiece Theatre, and, by God, we wouldn’t have any culture at all.
Downton Abbey! Downton Abbey!
Also, too, the unbearable twee-ness of Renaissance Faires.
Lojasmo
@Omnes Omnibus:
Nope. I turned 21 on an army base. Bought one shitty beer because I could.
kerFuFFler
On the subject of President Washington, I only recently became aware of just how extraordinarily wealthy he was. Adjusting for inflation and all, his holdings made him about the equivalent of someone today with about 500 million dollars.
This link has a fascinating summary of all the American Presidents’ financial circumstances. Definitely worth a look!
Chris
@Brachiator:
I have to say, I don’t get the appeal of that show, which everyone I know is raving about. I mean sure, it’s a good drama show if you like that type of TV (nothing wrong with you if you do), I just don’t see what makes it so extraordinary as opposed to any old show from the same genre.
Suffern ACE
@Steeplejack: Ok. But no one here mistakes Snooki for royalty.
Brachiator
@Chris:
I confess that I watch the show and have friends who love it. It’s not that it is extraordinary, and some of the plot lines are absolutely ridiculous. But it is a solid drama and the main characters appealingly drawn. And viewers wanted to root for Mr Bates to find some happiness. Some diehard fans even refer to themselves as Misterbaters.
FDRLincoln
Look, I’m not a monarchist, but all this hatred directed at QEII makes no sense to me. Given her position, she has to stay above politics as much as possible…HOWEVER, it has been rumored for years that she did not like Margaret Thatcher and expressed (quietly) her disapproval of the Conservative government in the early 80s. It is also strongly rumored that she disapproved of the Iraq War and expressed this to Blair.
The Windsors aren’t saints, but they aren’t reactionaries either.
Rafer Janders
@Brachiator:
People may dispute it, but it’s a matter of fact. The US has the least income mobility and the greatest income inequality of all major Western (including Japan) advanced industrial nations.
Chris
@FDRLincoln:
IMO, the Windsors are to Britain what Hollywood stars are to America. I don’t particularly care about them one way or the other (not that it matters as I’m not a Brit). I’m sure there’s a strong case to be made that they’re as useless as a bottle of dried glue, but class anger seems wasted on them when most of the trouble is being caused by politicians, bankers and the like.
Brachiator
@FDRLincoln:
They have changed with the times. There have always been members of the family who were outright fascists.
And the queen has to stay above politics not because of her position, but because of the law. It is a bit odd how the Brits have adjusted their system. The monarch is permitted to be the ceremonial head of state as long as he or she never does anything to try to actually rule. The queen even “invites” an elected prime minister to form a government and is regularly advised by the PM. But this is all a show.
The queen’s approval or disapproval of anything much more than the behavior of her pet Corgies is largely irrelevant. And if she actually made her sentiments known to the public, it would spark a governmental crisis.
Brachiator
@Rafer Janders: You were originally talking about social mobility and income inequality in the UK. There is much controversy there over a report released a few days ago on the failure of efforts to improve social mobility. I have problems with linking from a mobile device, but here is a slice of a story on the report from the Independent. You can easily find other analyses.
In the 1950s, professional jobs were open to a wide mix of people, who could work their way up from the bottom without a degree. But this did not last. In a classic comedy sketch from 1967, a 6ft 5in John Cleese, representing the upper class, looks down on the Two Ronnies, who represent the middle and working classes. Ronnie Barker says: “I look up to him [Cleese] because he is upper class and look down on him [Corbett] because he is lower class.” The tiny Corbett says: “I know my place.”
Today, although only 7 per cent of people are educated at private schools, they still have a “stranglehold” on the top professional jobs, Mr Milburn said. The “forgotten middle class” as well as those at the very bottom of the ladder miss out because they lack the right connections. So the next generation in the professions will look very similar to today’s.
double nickel
The Monarchy as head of state is really the only thing that distinguishes us Canucks from you Americans. Except for universal health care. And gun control. And maybe the CBC.
patrick II
Perhaps if we had a queen our own oligarchs would seem entitled and polite as opposed to entitled and obnoxious.
Rafer Janders
@Brachiator:
Nope, I was originally talking aobut social mobility and income inequality in the UK as compared to the the US. That’s why I wrote: “And let’s remember, it’s monarchical Britain which has greater class mobility and less income inequality than supposedly egalitarian America.”
Matters may have become worse in the UK, but that has nothing to do with my point that they are comparatively even worse in the US. We’re not in a position to criticize their supposed lack of opportunity and reverence for class when we’re doing less and less here.
If we want fawning over nobility, we only have to open a magazine or turn on the TV here to read some hero-worshipping profile of how a captain of finance enjoys his new luxury yacht made possible by off-shoring jobs to India.
OzoneR
I’ll be honest, I sometimes wonder if a monarchy would have done wonders for us in a sense that it would give us a uniting factor. Since our creation, the term “United States” has often to be a misnomer.
The fact that the head of state and government is the same person cannot be good for us. Nothing unite us- that’s why the right wing pushes stuff like a national language and protect the flag, because they’re throwing out these uniting ideas.
Ben Cisco
I think RomTrom3000(R) would look upon the royals (or more properly, ancient fuedal society) and imagine himself as the American equivalent, thus conducting himself as though entitled to the office of President. Think about it. Wealth passed down from a prior generation, added to by means of a “job” that mainly consisted of collecting
tributefees from hissubjectsclients; heck, he even has a wife who spends more on the horses than many of ourserfscitizens earn in a year.In his mind, the only thing missing is a crown.
Ben Cisco
@patrick II: NOT. A. CHANCE.
BrianM
If we had a hereditary head of state, I wager some percentage of the racists/nativists/tribalists who are outraged by Obama wouldn’t be.
By that, I mean some people’s visceral outrage seems a reaction to a youngish black man in a ceremonial and symbolic role. (The whole “he’s not one of us”, “not really an American” thing.) If some bland oldish white person represented the Spirit of the Nation, Obama would face less resistance.
That would be useful. Not right, but useful.
Ben Cisco
@OzoneR: For them it’s not about uniting – they are more than willing to be welcoming, so long as you act and vote EXACTLY as they do. That’s not unification, that’s conquest.
slacker
@Virginia Highlander: The united states got rid of an idiot king and have since been re-electing one for the last 224 years.
Villago Delenda Est
@BrianM:
The hatred of Clinton and Obama has to do with the fact that according to the Rethugs, they are NOT LEGITIMATE. They are usurpers. Since the glorious reign of the amiable dunce shitty grade Z movie star, only Rethugs are legitimately occupants of the White House…no matter how they got there, be it actual electoral victories or installation by five traitor Supreme Court “justices”.
Brachiator
@BrianM:
Are you suggesting that a hereditary head of state could embody all the feverish racist and exclusionary dreams of nativists and somehow allow for a more egalitarian political leadership? An interesting idea, but I am not sure that the contradictions could still be resolved.
I understand what you are suggesting about the problem that some see in having Obama represent them as ceremonial head of the country. But there is an equally visceral racist reaction that some of these morans have to the idea of Obama leading them. And even with some of the GOP Congressional obstructionism you get a whiff of “I refuse to take orders from a black man.”
As an aside, I’ve noted before the odd psychology of some people, including supposed liberals, who have no problems with working with women or nonwhites as peers, but who get prickly and resentful when a woman or nonwhite person becomes their supervisor.
Mnemosyne
@Brachiator:
Assuming it was not something congenital (such things happen), mumps contracted as a teenager or adult is the most likely culprit. It was well-known to cause male sterility even in the 1700s.
Occasionally people pop up who claim to be descended from George Washington through an affair he had with slaves, but given that he had no children with his wife, who had several children with her first husband, that seems very unlikely.
Svensker
@Amir Khalid:
Definitely skip Charles. It may be fun to see him at the thrift, but I’m still mad about Diana and no way does that Camilla get into the palace as King Consort!
LanceThruster
I say make Wavy Gravy our head of state. I just saw “Saint Misbehavin’ again and I was so moved by his “Basic Human Needs” poem.
Wouldn’t it be neat if the people that you meet
had shoes on their feet and something to eat?
HUGH ROMNEY 2012!
Amir Khalid
@Svensker: I think Camilla would be the Queen Consort to King Charles III, or whatever name he takes — unless, of course, you are referring to her looks.
Diana was the big star of the royal family in her lifetime. But she died 15 years ago. Is there still that much popular attachment to her memory?
Jamey
Looks like the Times and Post are using the Royal We-enie.
LanceThruster
Added to that, his trip through Afghanistan (Wavy Gravy) along the Kyber Pass seeing homes with pictures of Mecca and Kennedy side by side. The tank soldiers that surrounded him in a Gypsy camp and asked, “what do you need?” when he was headed to Bangladesh to deliver aid. They said, “we want to be in your army.”
There really are people who could represent the best of our national spirit on the world stage. Sad really.
Porlock Junior
Ten years ago, I was in Chichester for the convention of a very English organization. In the informal session in the pub, the chairman called for a toast to the Queen’s health, courteously asking us Yanks to join in, what with the Jubilee and all: the same sort of thing, after all, as a toast to the President back home.
It occurred to me, with a touch of envy, that personally I would far rather toast Her Majesty’s health than that of the person sitting fraudulently in the White House at the time. My daughter actually gave voice to the same sentiment, while laudably refraining from use of words like “fraud” or “lying sack of shit”.
So, even if I don’t get to the nearest pub this weekend, I’ll have to raise a toast in whatever will pass as a substitute for not-cold English bitter. And at least this year I could toast the POTUS.
Canuckistani Tom
@Amir Khalid:
Rumour has it that Charles has already decided on the Regal name King George VII
LanceThruster
And he put together a team of doctors to perform cataract surgery for the poorest of the poor on the Indian sub-continent. He said to people at fund raisers (the price of admission), “There’s people in another part of the world not bumping into stuff because of you.”
Glob, that made me smile.
Doctor My Eyes, Indeed
Hugh Romney 2012!
Wavy Gravy needs the Chuck Norris interwebs treatement.
“Wavy Gravy brought people down off the brown acid, by telling them they weren’t poisoned, they were just high, and that it would wear off. They then became the doctor for the next person in need of help.”
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne: Washington was physically impressive, but got hit with a slew of maladies as a young man. From the doctorzebra site.
From the age of 17 to almost the end of his life, Washington had recurrent attacks of malaria. Malaria was then common in Virginia. Interestingly, an effective treatment for malaria had been discovered in the previous century. But for some reason, Washington did not receive the treatment until 1784, when he was in his 50s. To add to the mystery, soldiers in the Revolutionary Army were treated for malaria as early as 1776
smallpox At age 19 Washington and his half-brother Lawrence spent time on the island of Barbados, hoping the climate would benefit Lawrence. Lawrence was ill with tuberculosis. Around this time George developed a severe case of smallpox, which ultimately left his skin scarred for life.
Later, as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army in the 1770s, Washington took an unprecedented step by insisting that no recruit could join the army until vaccinated against smallpox.
tuberculosis Shortly after returning to Mount Vernon from Barbados, Washington developed tuberculosis. (Tuberculous pleurisy, to be precise.) This, no doubt, he caught from Lawrence. It occurred soon after the smallpox. Washington took two years to recover fully. He had another episode of fever and pleurisy at age 25, in conjunction with an attack of dysentery .
ETA: An episode of mumps is not recorded, but obviously is very possible.
Villago Delenda Est
@Canuckistani Tom:
Well, considering what happened to Charles I, that’s not a bad idea.
WereBear
@Brachiator: After smallpox, would the man even notice the mumps?
People ditched the monarchy because we finally realized what a brutal case of Asking For It the institution represented. Elizabeth I was a helluva monarch, but just how many murders and mayhem led up to it? The gyrations of securing a male heir, and then winding up with a genetically deformed Hapsburg, indicated that it was no guarantee of any kind of decent government.
Heliopause
I’ve long been in favor of taking adult Americans who express this sentiment in public and making them attend remedial civics class with 8th graders. Not an hour or two, an entire semester, with the 13 year olds. At the end they have to recite Article One, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution perfectly and if they don’t, kill them.