Editorials & Other Articles

Uncle Joe

(65,387 posts) Tue Apr 28, 2026, 05:31 PM Tuesday

Mission accomplished as king's speech to Congress goes down a storm

Charles quoted Wilde and Dickens in measured masterclass – and no tirade as yet from mad monarch in White House

(snip)

The British monarch mobilised an elite squad of dead white men, leavened with humour and subliminal politicking, on Tuesday in a charm offensive aimed over Donald Trump’s head and squarely at the US Congress. Judging by the cheers and minute-long applause he received at the end, the soft power flex worked a treat and the special relationship lives to fight another day.

(snip)

But entirely predictably, the name Iran never’s passed Charles’s 77-year-old lips. Nor did Israel, nor immigration, nor climate, nor a bunch of other hot potatoes in the Trump era. Instead the king delivered an exquisitely measured masterclass in less-is-more, emphasising common bonds that long predate Trump and – hopefully! – will long outlast him.

(snip)

The king went on: “In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, when Nato invoked article 5 for the first time, and the United Nations security council was united in the face of terror, we answered the call together.” It did not take a giant leap of imagination to see this as gentle chiding of the Nato-bashing Trump.

And when the monarch spoke of “unyielding resolve needed for the defence of Ukraine and her most courageous people”, the roar of approval in the chamber may have been jarring to the ears of the attendant Vance.

(snip)

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/28/king-charles-congress-trump

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Mission accomplished as king's speech to Congress goes down a storm (Original Post) Uncle Joe Tuesday OP

Aides are probably still drawing straws for who has to explain it to him. tanyev Tuesday #1

As Ebenezer Screw sees the Ghost of Christmas Past. usonian Tuesday #2

I was pissed Charles had to come buzzycrumbhunger Tuesday #3

The British govt. asked him to make the visit yorkster Tuesday #5

I have never been a fan of the monarchy, but Bluetus Tuesday #4

tanyev

(49,492 posts)

1. Aides are probably still drawing straws for who has to explain it to him.

Reply to Uncle Joe (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2026, 05:42 PM

Tuesday

usonian

(26,233 posts)

2. As Ebenezer Screw sees the Ghost of Christmas Past.

Reply to Uncle Joe (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2026, 05:43 PM

Tuesday

And the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come.

buzzycrumbhunger

(2,103 posts)

3. I was pissed Charles had to come

Reply to Uncle Joe (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2026, 05:51 PM

Tuesday

I mean, firstly because who the fuck cares—and I still find it sickening he was able to replace Diana with his grizzled piece on the side, but my main objection is that in repeatedly meeting with this monster, it legitimizes him.

That said, I didn’t expect anything good to come of this…

I’m pleasantly surprised to see Chuck managed to get his digs in. And hooray—he’ll be on the other side of the Atlantic before Cheetoh Mussolini can even understand half of it.

yorkster

(3,914 posts)

5. The British govt. asked him to make the visit

Reply to buzzycrumbhunger (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 28, 2026, 07:25 PM

Tuesday

in response to Trump's invitation. His speech was eloquent, elegant and witty. And quite substantive.
I'm glad you were pleasantly surprised.
I did wince a bit at your description of Camilla, truth be told.

Bluetus

(3,006 posts)

4. I have never been a fan of the monarchy, but

Reply to Uncle Joe (Original post)

Tue Apr 28, 2026, 05:55 PM

Tuesday

I must admit there are times where a person in that position can play an important role as the adult in the room.

And it sounds as if Congressional Republicans and Democrats alike appreciated this moment of normalcy and reason, even if it was just a momentary interruption to the madness and criminality of Trump.

I guess it did not have to be stated that Charles did deliver some consequences to Andrew -- far more than anything that has been done on this side of the pond.

Reply to this discussion