From: Gene McAloon 

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:17:46 -0500, Judy Folkenberg
 wrote:

>Maybe not as stuck as you think.  If the present is any indication of the
future, then
>William might not be king until he's in his mid-fifties.   Heck, Charles still
isn't king
>yet...his mother is holding tight to the throne.  And I'm not so sure Charles
would be
>bypassed as king in favor of William.  I think there's a certain son/father
loyality and
>William would not want Charles bypassed in favor of himself.
>
>Nope, head for NYC William.  You'd have a great time!

Hah! That's a joke. If having the throne were really worth anything I have
little doubt William would gladly smother his father in bed some night,
perhaps with the connivance of a jealous servant no longer allowed access
to the royal bed. That is what royals do. Loyalty between father and son? 
Not if what is to be gained in worth the son getting rid of the father and
good riddance.

But of course the throne no longer begins to be worth much of anything. If
William finally takes the throne it won't be out of loyalty to his father,
but loyalty to the country, duty, dynasty, tradition, etc., etc.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5