...it seems the sword is a bit dull and the two heads are now both octogenarians with severe dementia...
Funny, I didn't realise Rishi Sunak was that old?
Seriously though, the equivalent of Biden is not the monarch, but the British PM. For all the bluster of republicans who whinge about the royals, the fact is that the politicians run the country, not the monarch or any royals.
Regarding Charles, I would say that even many sympathetic or positive towards royalty and their role in British history (such as myself) are much less invested in the accession of this adulterer king than they were in the reign of his mother. The UK and Commonwealth have been fortunate to have had nearly a century of two monarchs who actually embodied public service, in George VI and Elizabeth II. But that pattern is about to end with Charles, who is much more self-centred and spoilt.
As soon as his mother had died and he became king, Charles was caught having a spoilt tantrum over a leaky pen. That was a small indication of the sort of person he is, which those of us in the UK who have observed him over years were not surprised about in the slightest. Now the idea of the public making a "pledge of allegiance" to the king is another, even more egregious, example of how Charles completely misunderstands his relationship with the people.
I thought Charles dumping Dianna for Camilla
Charles did not "dump" Diana for Camilla - in truth, he never gave up pursuing Camilla even during his marriage to Diana. Charles and Camilla first met in the 1970s, but she went on to marry another man. One article about their history says:
It is known that Camilla and Charles were romantically involved periodically both before and during each of their first marriages. Their relationship was highly publicised in the media and attracted attention for all the wrong reasons.
When Charles met Diana Spencer in 1981, he was still seeing Camilla. In Diana: Her True Story, author Andrew Morton wrote that Diana almost called off the wedding two days before it was due to take place after she found a bracelet Charles got made for Camilla.
Camilla's divorce was finalised in 1995. Charles and Diana's marriage officially ended in 1996.
After a lot of push against Camilla within the Royal family for various reasons, the two finally got married on February 10, 2005, in Windsor Castle.
And then of course there was the awful "Tampongate" conversation. Ugh.
Charles was determined to maintain the relationship for his own sake and has insisted he got his way all the way to today, first insisting he be allowed to marry Camilla, and now insisting she be styled 'queen' consort (although few Britons will ever accept calling her that!)
With Diana, I suspect he thought he would get a glamorous queen for public appearances and a mother to give him heirs, while being able to have his mistress Camilla on call in the background. Once his marriage fell apart, he determined to bring Camilla in, regardless of what his family or the public thought - and still insist on having the crown in time, too, despite the protocol and constitutional implications. He didn't even have the 'honour' to take Edward VIII's route out (when he renounced the throne to marry Wallis Simpson) and step aside in favour of his son William. No, Charles wants it all on his own terms. Never a good sign from any monarch through history (nor, to be fair, any politician - but we're used to them behaving that way!)
His entire adult life has been about him getting his own way. The problem with being heir to the throne for decades is that he's been groomed to expect this for so long, I think he genuinely believes he's 'entitled' to it, in every sense.
