home

Princess Kate Delivers Healthy Baby Boy

Update: It's a boy.

The Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, also known as Princess Kate, has entered a London hospital in the early stages of labor.

This is really big news in England. The media has been camped outside the hospital for days.

Following tradition, after the baby is born, a notice with details will be posted on the easel pictured above.

The formal announcement that a baby has been born will be made in a statement driven by car from the hospital across London and posted on an easel in the grounds of Buckingham Palace.

There will also be a 41-gun salute.[More...]

The baby will be third in line for the throne, bumping Prince Harry down to fourth. (Prince Charles and Prince William are first and second.) Due to a recent law change, the baby will retain the position regardless of gender. That means if the baby is a girl, she will not lose her place to an eventual younger brother. Queen Elizabeth has been Queen for 61 years.

I'm happy for them. I hope the baby is a girl. It will be interesting to see how a baby is raised when it's known in advance she will be Queen one day. I also hope they have another child soon. I think it could be lonely growing up in such a big big palace with just nannies and no siblings. Especially if she isn't given the freedom to roam without supervision, like Eloise at the Plaza.

< Sunday Open Thread | Zimmerman: Good Samaritans and Racial Injustice >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    ln labor? (5.00 / 12) (#8)
    by Dadler on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:05:18 AM EST
    I coulda sworn she was a Tory for life. Ahem.

    Maybe the baby be healthy and the media firestorm be mild, for everyone's sake.

    When the stodgy King George V (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by chezmadame on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:13:42 AM EST
    had his very first audience with the his very first Labour PM, the king wore a red tie. The man obviously had a sense of humor.

    G.B. Shaw wrote this racy (apocryphal) exchange between George and his queen (Mary) who was known as May.

    May George?
    George May!

    Parent

    MAY the baby be healthy, that is (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dadler on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:00:47 AM EST
    Jaysus...

    Parent
    "Maybe the baby" (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:02:33 AM EST
    Is much funnier and more lyrical.

    :)

    Parent

    What is proper for (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:54:37 AM EST
    celebration of the royal birth?  I assume the old public beheadings are no longer in vogue, but will there be Labour Day back-to-school sales?  

    I hope Kate is talimg advantage of her (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:19:36 AM EST
    labor privilege to cuss up a blue streak and call the future King of England every name in the book. Just cuz she can.

    I hope she can do that even if she is (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by vml68 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25:40 AM EST
    not in labor! It makes for a healthy relationship... :-)

    Parent
    She has a good head on her shoulders (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:41:22 AM EST
    Let's keep it there!

    Parent
    LOL! (none / 0) (#117)
    by Zorba on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:25:25 PM EST
    They don't behead uppity wives any more.  
    And at any rate, the UK abolished capital punishment for everyone.        ;-)

    Parent
    Well there is always the (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:30:29 PM EST
    Tower of London. ;o)

    This is snark - what can I say - sometimes my strange sense of humor gets away from me.

    Parent

    Hope she can, but I would not be taking my chances (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:40:05 AM EST
    Boy! (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Teresa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:31:24 PM EST


    Good for them! (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:35:19 PM EST
    But I was hoping to see a girl.

    As long as everyone is healthy!

    Parent

    I wanted to see a girl, too, just (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Teresa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:40:27 PM EST
    because. I wouldn't be here to see her become Queen, it's just the principle, lol!

    Parent
    I was hoping girl too... (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by indy in sc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:43:54 PM EST
    the prospective names were nicer than those for a boy! :)

    Glad that everyone is doing well.  As jbindc said--a nice diversion from all the news lately.

    Parent

    Historically speaking, the reigns ... (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:46:44 PM EST
    ... and accomplishments of British queens have often proved much more influential and enduring than most of their male counterparts.

    The legendary warrior Queen Boudica of the Iceni (who lived in present-day East Anglia) led Britons to revolt against the Roman Empire in the first century A.D., after her husband King Prasutagus (a Roman ally) had died and lawless Roman troops from the IX Legion Hispanica attacked her people, and raped and enslaved their two daughters. When Boudica protested to the local Roman procurator Catus Decianus, he had her publicly flogged.

    In vengeance, Boudica led the Iceni to war with Rome. She and her troops set upon the offending IX Legion as it traveled south, and in the resultant Battle of Colchester, she freed her daughters and slaughtered every Roman soldier to a man, before capturing and destroying the Roman provincial capital of Londinium, the site of present-day London. Triumphant, she allegedly had Catus Decianus castrated alive and then crucified according to Roman law, only with his own scrotum shoved in his mouth. An estimated 60-80,000 Romans eventually lost their lives to Boudica's rebellion. Rome re-established its authority in Britain only upon her death in A.D. 60 or 61.

    (Nearly forgotten, save for the Roman texts which chronicled her exploits, Boudica's legend was resurrected by Queen Victoria, and a bronze statue of her was commissioned by Victoria's husband Prince Albert. Completed in 1905, "Boadicea" -- the Latin name for Boudica -- sits today along the Thames River in London at Westminster Bridge near the Houses of Parliament, ironically standing guard over the very city she had once razed to the ground.)

    As a monarch who ruled with near-absolute authority, Queen Elizabeth I vanquished the Spanish Armada in 1588 and established England as a major power on the European stage. And because she had no direct descendants, the crown passed to her cousin James VI of Scotland, who became James I of England, uniting these intensely nationalistic and rival countries under one ruler for the first time.

    The long and storied reign of Queen Victoria (1838-1901) was marked by huge territorial expansions across the globe, a so-called "Golden Age" of imperialism which established the British Empire as arguably the first true superpower of modern world history.

    Conversely, the current Queen Elizabeth II has presided over the formal dissolution of that empire, and the establishment of the British Commonwealth in its place, while London had maintained its position as a true financial center of the world economy.

    In short, British queens kick a$$. Aloha.

    Parent

    I was just thinking--where are Donald and Brodie? (none / 0) (#124)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:06:37 PM EST
    Yes, a BOY - I'm shocked! (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Cashmere on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:32:29 PM EST


    Sorry BTD (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:34:56 PM EST
    No shoes, we'll take the shirt off your back though :)

    So unlike BTD (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:19:30 PM EST
    to bet on a false favorite.

    Parent
    And the most popular name was for a girl (none / 0) (#90)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:23:31 PM EST
    Tabloid hacking under control :)

    Parent
    You did say he was betting flawed chalk? (none / 0) (#91)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:24:30 PM EST
    It's a boy! 8 lbs, 6 oz (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:41:51 PM EST
    Congrats to the new parents!

    Yes, and you, too, Anne! (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Teresa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:45:31 PM EST
    I didn't know until you posted something Friday night that you have a little 7 month old grandson! That's just wonderful and I know a joy to you. I hate I missed your excitement of becoming a grandmother. I know he's lucky, though.

    Parent
    Oh, Teresa, that's so nice - thank you! (5.00 / 4) (#79)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:56:57 PM EST
    I love being a grandma - it's just the best thing ever, and my grandson is a shining light.  Crawling, pulling himself up to stand, and beginning to cruise a little.

    And cute as a button, of course.  Nothing warms my heart like one of his big, toothless grins!

    I'm so lucky to have him so close by, as I get to see him a lot - I never turn down a chance to watch him!

    Parent

    He's crawling already? (none / 0) (#109)
    by Teresa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:07:21 PM EST
    I'm sure he's a little doll. The comment you wrote that informed me and tickled me was him spending the day clung to your hip.

    My niece (who is like my daughter) that I wrote about in med school that lived with me for 3+ years - her little girl is the closest I'll get to grandma feelings, at least until my step-daughter has a baby. She tugged my heart so much (still does) that it made me regret not having children.

    My life didn't work out that way so I enjoy grandkids by listening/reading how much fun my friends have. Please keep us updated in Open Threads. I want to know what he's up to!

    Parent

    This is getting irritating (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:09:05 PM EST
    Nothing is showing up as a new comment for me in this thread.

    It's coming and going for me, too. (none / 0) (#112)
    by Teresa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:14:22 PM EST
    I need to find Jeralyn's post on settings again. I think she had ratings off, but that's the only difference.

    It makes it hard to skim so I've been trying to go by time posted.

    Parent

    It started again a day or so ago with me, only on (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:23:28 PM EST
    the top post, all others seem to be fine.

    Parent
    Don't worry about it (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by sj on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:38:50 PM EST
    I don't think comment settings are going to help a bit. At least it didn't do a thing for me.

    And yes, going by the time posted makes sense, if it was based on the last time you loaded the page. But that would have to be done algorithmically and it isn't something you can do with your settings.

    Parent

    I was hoping for a girl (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:15:33 PM EST
    Just because of the change in the law.  It would have been cool to have the birth of the first girl born to be Queen, no questions asked.
    But maybe they will spice the whole event up by giving him some horrid English name like Manfred or Bartholomew.

    Ditto on hoping for a girl. (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:24:47 PM EST
    I'd love an unusual name but ain't gonna happen.

    Parent
    I hope it's George, after the great great (none / 0) (#165)
    by melamineinNY on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:33:31 PM EST
    grandfather.

    Parent
    Not going to happen (none / 0) (#166)
    by Politalkix on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:36:47 PM EST
    so soon after the catastrophic presidency of GWB!
    :-).

    Parent
    Not going to happen? : ) (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:09:32 PM EST
    George Alexander Louis (Louis?!!!)

    Parent
    Louis Mountbatten (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:19:03 PM EST
    A strong favorite of the Royal family.

    Parent
    Most likely. As I discovered later, Lord (none / 0) (#195)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:03:44 PM EST
    Mountbatten's first name was Louis. I posted an excerpt about his advice to Charles on the Tuesday open thread.

    Parent
    Breathtaking! (none / 0) (#196)
    by Politalkix on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 10:41:36 PM EST
    George Louis Costanza and Jason Alexander are having their royal moments. link
    The little one is possibly "breathtaking" :-).

    Parent
    Outside the box. I never heard this first (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:16:43 PM EST
    name until the case that will not die came along.

    Me Neither (none / 0) (#131)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:18:41 PM EST
    Hmmm (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by chrisvee on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:14:27 PM EST
    CNN's Royal Contributor characterized Kate as brilliant for having a boy 'first time.'

    :sigh::

    Just saw him! (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 01:17:57 PM EST
    They are still "working on a name" but he is bald (all we could see!), but he stuck his little hand out and waved!  He's got the job down!

    Get used to the glare kid (none / 0) (#178)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 01:30:17 PM EST
    And in the Internet age (none / 0) (#180)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 02:15:11 PM EST
    yes, he has his father's hair (none / 0) (#186)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:52:17 AM EST
    pity.  ;)

    Parent
    Apparently (none / 0) (#188)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:48:33 AM EST
    Kate made a similar comment - (paraphrasing here) "He has more hair than his father".

    Parent
    Correction (none / 0) (#189)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:27:41 AM EST
    It was William who said the baby "got way more hair than me, thank God!"

    Parent
    Good news (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:18:42 AM EST
    An especially nice diversion after weeks and weeks of bad news.

    Here's the headline from The (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:11:25 AM EST
    Telegraph:

    Duchess of Cambridge goes into labour: reaction and developments - live


    You'd think (none / 0) (#3)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:15:30 AM EST
    they could just fax over the announcement.

    Follow Her Majesty (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:20:38 AM EST
    Who says the royals aren't worth the ! (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:08:56 AM EST
    They need some work on their Twitter speak (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:13:44 AM EST
    Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge has been admitted to St. Mary's Hospital, Paddington, London in the early stages of labour.

    Twitter and highfalutin snooty don't mix.

    Cut that puppy down to "Kate's having her baby"

    Parent

    Not to mention repetitive. . (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:23:11 AM EST
    "Changing of the guard."

    Parent
    thanks (none / 0) (#172)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:34:27 PM EST
    so much fun


    Parent
    The current betting favorite for a name (none / 0) (#5)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:31:04 AM EST
    is Alexandra, followed by George, Victoria, and Charlotte. Unless someone has an inside scoop on gender (quite likely) the odds defy logic as there are more male babies than female babies.

    The biggest movement has been on Isabella.

    Assuming smart money is going with female names because someone has insider knowledge, I'm thinking Jeralyn will get her hope for a baby girl.

    I think (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:40:11 AM EST
    most of the world (who actually care) are hoping for a girl because she will be the first female British monarch-in-waiting who will be allowed to ascend to the throne, no matter the gender of any future siblings.

    THAT'S pretty cool.

    Parent

    My money is on: (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:48:15 AM EST
    If a baby King:  Ethan, Aaron, or Jayden; If a baby Queen, Madysen, Dakota, or Chloe.    Now I am just sitting back and thinking about how I will spend all my winnings.

    Parent
    Ha! I am hoping for some hollywood style (none / 0) (#51)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:51:38 AM EST
    names. I think I will be disappointed. Princess Apple? Probably not.

    Parent
    If Gwyneth does not object, (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    I think Apple works.   But not, Orange--politically incorrect what with the "Troubles" and all.

    Parent
    Bradzolena. Perfect. (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:07:57 PM EST
    I forget. What did KK name her kid? (none / 0) (#81)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:09:06 PM EST
    North, last name "West." (none / 0) (#82)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:14:38 PM EST
    North West.

    [sigh]

    Parent

    Worse, I knew who you meant (5.00 / 4) (#86)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:16:59 PM EST
    when you referred to "KK."

    Parent
    Seriously?? (none / 0) (#87)
    by vml68 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:17:37 PM EST
    I don't know how I missed that!

    Parent
    I think it is a rather (none / 0) (#159)
    by ZtoA on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:59:08 PM EST
    cool name. They HAD to have a cool name and it works for me. I wouldn't mind having a grandson named North.

    Parent
    North (none / 0) (#85)
    by indy in sc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:15:53 PM EST
    As in North West.

    Parent
    Wonder where these names are on the betting list? (none / 0) (#52)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:53:49 AM EST
    Bella
    Emma
    Katniss

    Simon
    Sebastian
    Jaxon

    Parent

    I vote for catnip (none / 0) (#55)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:03:43 PM EST
    Oh yes I read the books.

    Parent
    Because I'm an odds junkie (none / 0) (#58)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:11:18 PM EST
    none of your six are on the list (unless Bella counts the same as Isabella in which case 20-1)

    Parent
    That's probably a pretty good prediction of the (none / 0) (#59)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:16:07 PM EST
    Bella odds.  I actually thought they might go with Isabella, but it could be shortened to Izzy which I think they would dislike.  They will end up with a traditional name, I'm sure.  

    Parent
    You missed Jaxon, Jayson, Stryker, (none / 0) (#53)
    by vml68 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:54:19 AM EST
    Britny, Tiffini, Cheyenne,etc

    Parent
    Tex, Jax and Max. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:55:20 AM EST
    Violet, Ruby and Rose.

    Parent
    I'm going with (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:08:32 PM EST
    Mary Elizabeth if it's a girl, and Edward George if it's a boy; when you're that close to the throne, you don't get a contemporary name, but one with royal presence and history.

    Parent
    You need to add names! (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:19:03 PM EST
    Mary Elizabeth Caroline Diana Victoria

    Parent
    LOL - I thought about that...kept (none / 0) (#61)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:29:26 PM EST
    remembering when Charles and Diana got married: "Charles Philip Arthur George" is quite the royal handle, isn't it?

    The Queen's name is "Elizabeth Alexandra Mary," so maybe if it's a girl, she won't need 4 names...

    I didn't realize that Elizabeth's mother was also Elizabeth, full name "Elizabeth Angela Marguerite."

    Kind of hoping for a girl; guess we'll know soon!

    Parent

    Hmmm (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:37:43 PM EST
    Marguerite, Margherita, Margarita. You take the first and I'll take the last two for lunch.

    Parent
    My sister's first name is Marguerite. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:39:46 PM EST
    I've always loved that name.

    Parent
    "Edward" has some historical context (none / 0) (#83)
    by Towanda on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:15:21 PM EST
    all too recent in royal memory, and perhaps public -- or at least Hollywood -- memory.  With continued public discussion of the relevance of the medieval institution in the modern millennium, I wonder if the name might be considered jinxing for abdication in 2050 or so.  I note that the name was given by Charles and Diana only to the second son.  

    Parent
    Reading around the blogs (none / 0) (#94)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:39:45 PM EST
    and papers, and Edward as a first name is not seen as a likely choice.

    Parent
    The historical connexion (none / 0) (#98)
    by christinep on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:40:57 PM EST
    It does limit the available names, doesn't it?  Though it is not as restrictive as the ever-there Olaf in Norway or Karl/Christian in Sweden, I believe.  And, in Denmark, isn't there even an "approved" registry of names for all Danes, royal & everyone else?

    Here's my try for the Royal Boy:  Albert Charles Edward Harold.

    Parent

    Poor kids (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:41:30 PM EST
    they never get their own names.

    Parent
    I had a dream last night (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Aspidistra on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:50:56 PM EST
    Elizabeth I, Victoria I, Elizabeth II....
    Victoria II.

    I dreamt it last night - someday this baby will be the fourth Queen of England, and the royal family is hoping to continue the run of luck the the U.K. has had with female monarchs by naming her Victoria.

    Queen Victoria the Second.  Here's wishing her a long and happy life, whatever happens to the monarchy over the next 50-60 years.

    Parent

    I agree -- Victoria... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Cashmere on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:19:51 PM EST
    Plus, it is a beautiful name!

    Parent
    Maybe BTD will drop in and tell (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:51:31 AM EST
    us his bets????

    Parent
    Girl (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:09:29 AM EST
    Seriously. I bet it a few months ago.

    Parent
    Ha. But what's the over under etc.? (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:10:53 AM EST
    Yeah, what's the cushion (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:16:04 AM EST
    Or the hedge?

    They are talking about pollination from the birth canal on CNN, I'm dyin laughing.  Can't talk about that unless an heir to the crown is being born....then it's all the rage.

    Parent

    Who are the experts on this breaking story? (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:18:26 AM EST
    Some midwifery person I think (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:20:13 AM EST
    They are gone now.  Apparently the sex is known, she said she knew but had been sworn to secrecy.  Let me rewind the DVR and get her name.

    Parent
    Dr. Nancy Snyderman (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:23:48 AM EST
    What is your rationale for (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:28:10 AM EST
    DVRing this?

    Parent
    No no no (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:30:45 AM EST
    You get a rewind window on the channel you are on.  I'm not recording it.  I swear.  I have a life.  I had babies too, who wants to do that again? And people that record birthing are not allowed around me.

    Parent
    DVR... (none / 0) (#43)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:05:27 AM EST
    ...just a note, that a DVR is always recoding, two hours I believe, so any program you are watching can be rewound.

    The difference between this and normal recoding is it doesn't save it once the channel is flipped.  

    It also allows you to record a show, from the beginning even if you don't start recording until midway through.

    I always leave my station on TBS, then when I get home from work, I can rewind it to the start of Seinfeld, which is the show I listen to when making dinner.

    Parent

    Nancy Snyderman is a medical doctor. She is (none / 0) (#66)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:43:41 PM EST
    a surgeon whose specialty is neck and throat cancers. She is currently a medical reporter for NBC.

    She is not a midwife.

    Parent

    Hey, it isn't my fault (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:57:46 PM EST
    That someone texted her the babys sex moments before she was put on television talking about vaginal delivery for bacterial colonization.

    You seem to be a bit of a scold. I did rewind it and posted that she was a doctor.

    Parent

    I wasn't scolding or criticizing or anything (none / 0) (#69)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:03:32 PM EST
    like that. I was just setting the record straight. No offense intended.

    Parent
    See first she talks about the vag bacteria thing (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:15:33 PM EST
    I'm working with my clay artsy stuff, so my head swivels round.  What the?  Is this really cable news?  That is so not sexy :)  That's doula talk.

    Then she says that someone just secretly texted her the sex of the royal baby.  Nobody in their right mind would admit that on network anything, certainly nobody who had graduated from stateside medical school and HIPAA and all that, so now I'm thinking she is a mad doula :)

    Parent

    Oops...colonization (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:26:25 AM EST
    Not pollination :). Friggin iPad

    Parent
    Still confusing nwhat is colonizing? The royl (none / 0) (#25)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:36:29 AM EST
    baby?

    Parent
    It's that vag birthing thing (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:40:17 AM EST
    Where the baby gets bacterial exposure that supposedly kicks off its immune system.  You know, talking about stuff that makes guys leave the room :)

    Parent
    Warning: parental caution. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:41:45 AM EST
    We still have time to retrain you (none / 0) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:17:25 AM EST
    for betting purposes before Gator season, but you can't have an over/under on a boy or a girl.

    Parent
    How about this? Is BTD betting against (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:21:40 AM EST
    The line or whatever the term is re football?

    Parent
    He's betting the chalk (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:24:13 AM EST
    but statistically flawed chalk.

    Parent
    Of course (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:27:37 AM EST
    Girls get chalk.....again....sigh

    Parent
    But with c sections, Royal family could have fixed it . . .

    Parent
    You can no longer bet on (none / 0) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:33:09 AM EST
    The name Alexandra though.  They are no longer taking bets due to too much moola bet on Alexandra.

    Supposedly baby is here

    Parent

    No l.onger taking bets on girl!s name? (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:36:54 AM EST
    Smells like money to me!

    Which is good cuz, erm, baby needs a new pair of shoes . . .

    Groooan.

    Parent

    Is there any talk (none / 0) (#36)
    by chezmadame on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:48:12 AM EST
    about Diana being included in the name?

    Parent
    Some people want someplace (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:58:43 AM EST
    for the name Spencer, for a boy I read.

    Parent
    Last I saw (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:06:22 AM EST
    Diana was 16-1 (a long shot as it would be a bit of a potshot at Dad and Stepmom for the first born). Camilla is 100-1 (should be 10,000 to 1)

    Parent
    You're a hoot (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:51:32 AM EST
    A boy named Sue? (none / 0) (#37)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:51:56 AM EST
    Though the Brits do go for boy's names like Evelyn and Marian.

    I didn't bet the name.

    Tracy could tell you possibly.

    Parent

    It is very low on the bet list (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:56:01 AM EST
    Gossip claims that the couple were looking at an Indian name for a girl.  That bit was linked to a story that seemed to originate among people around Camilla. Is Alexandra an Indian name?

    Parent
    Diana (none / 0) (#39)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:56:57 AM EST
    Could be a third or fourth name.

    Parent
    They might (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:00:34 AM EST
    It is all their option from what I read.

    Parent
    Quick change to Alexander then! (none / 0) (#92)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:31:57 PM EST
    I love the name Alexander (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:36:12 PM EST
    The bets were for George

    Parent
    I prefer Alexander too... (none / 0) (#99)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:41:53 PM EST
    George is much too staid for me.

    Parent
    Also read that more than a couple of (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:03:27 AM EST
    People were pushing for scheduled C-section....to include physicians, they thought it would be healthier for Kate and baby.  For shame, probably a bunch of old men :)  Kate said NO!

    Parent
    I bet their second delivery will be induced as (none / 0) (#121)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:54:35 PM EST
    birth weight of #1 was high.

    Parent
    Too funny! (none / 0) (#30)
    by vml68 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:02:07 AM EST
    Gamblers Anonymous is calling your name...:-)

    Parent
    Becoming a mother (none / 0) (#67)
    by lily on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:52:42 PM EST
    I am not one to care about royals one bit.

    However I care deeply about mothers. I become a mother 27 years ago yesterday, and learned that the love you experience immediately upon holding your precious child is profound beyond words.

    I still look back to my natural birth labor as one of the best experiences in my life. Just like climbing a Colorado 14,000' mountain the rewards are immeasurable.

    Best to Kate, motherhood is a fabulous journey.

    Strange, my memories of natural birth (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:59:03 PM EST
    labor aren't anywhere close to positive.

    Parent
    Everyone is different, (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by Zorba on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:30:33 PM EST
    But I was glad to have had natural childbirth for both my children.  I found it to be a very positive experience.  Not an easy thing at all, but I felt that it was best for my babies, and a very, well, what can I say, natural and empowering experience for me, as well.

    Parent
    I have no doubt it was better for all. (none / 0) (#142)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:41:50 PM EST
    But I was not anticipating it. When I met the OB in the hall in the afternoon and confronted him, he said, do you see anyone else walking the halls who delivered this morning?  Good point.

    Parent
    I pretty much remember it as torture (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:51:46 PM EST
    but I did it twice and both times the babies were large, so I must have thought it was worth it at the time.

    Parent
    Especially when ... (none / 0) (#110)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:07:39 PM EST
    ... one has nannies and governesses and footmen at one's beck and call, 24 / 7 / 365.

    Parent
    funny you should mention that... (none / 0) (#114)
    by lily on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:22:50 PM EST
    one big mistake I made was living too far from family for reliable help in a crisis. I remember when I herniated a lumbar disk with a 5 month old baby and a 4 year old with a flu so bad he was dehydrated exploding at both ends. My husband boss at UCB Boalt Law School refused him family leave, they said hire a day nurse, naturally as a young struggling family we could not afford such. So plan B, my husband left me on the floor in the morning on my back with a stack of diapers, baby toys, a smoothie and muffins. The four year old learned quickly to manage on his own. He was a great big brother and mother's helper.

    Parent
    Thank God (none / 0) (#147)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:49:43 PM EST
    I had my in laws close when my babies were babies.  In many ways they were a pain (like sticking a bottle in Ben's mouth every time I turned my back and I was breast feeding) but I could not have survived without them.

    Parent
    Baby BoyGeorge? (none / 0) (#84)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:15:36 PM EST
    I can't see them dealing with the Boy George jokes. The next highest betting names after George were James, Alexander, and Henry.

    Well (none / 0) (#89)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:21:55 PM EST
    Each monarch takes a name upon becoming monarch.  (Elizabeth II chose to keep her own name in a break with tradition).  It is predicted that Charles may become King George VII, so that may factor into the naming.

    And here's a little fun fact:

    The US has had 44 presidents (43 men)

    The new royal baby, assuming both Charles and William take the throne, will become the 43rd monarch since William the Conqueror.

    Baby Cambridge will be the 43rd monarch since William the Conqueror obtained the English crown in 1066, but is also 41st in direct line of descent from Egbert, King of Wessex, who ruled from 802 to 839.


    Parent
    There is no tradition of regnal names in the UK (none / 0) (#95)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:23:51 PM EST
    whatsoever and regnal names have only been used thrice throughout the British monarchy, the tradition being to reign under the first baptismal name. All three exceptions are based on taking the second of a double barrelled name which were popular around that time. The three monarchs that have used regnal names are:

    1. Queen Victoria: baptised Alexandrina Victoria (a double barrelled name) but referred to as Princess Victoria from birth which she continued to use as monarch.

    2. King Edward VII: baptised Albert Edward (double barrelled) chose to drop his consort father's first name, Albert, and reign with the second of the barrel, Edward.

    3. King George VI: baptised Albert Frederick Arthur George (two double barrelled names), similar to what his brother King Edward VII had done before he abdicated to marry the American divorcee, Mrs Simpson, he chose to drop Albert but instead of Frederick he chose to adopt the 2nd name of his 2nd double barrelled name under which to reign.


    Parent
    There was an article (none / 0) (#103)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:49:24 PM EST
    In 2005, I think, that stated the Charles was considering taking the name King George VII, because the Charles I was executed for treason and his son, Charles II was much more of a party boy. And who wants to be associated with / compare with that?

    Now, of course, there was a swift and official denial because it's in pretty bad taste to float around what he wants to be called as soon as his mother dies. And of course, if he really did discuss this, it shouldn't have left the palace walls.

    But, as you point out, it's not unprecedented in modern history (I was incorrect in saying they all did it).

    Parent

    Well, I say to hell with tradition. (none / 0) (#106)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:58:04 PM EST
    Prince William should bestow upon his son a quintessentially British name, one which would forever compel the boy to rise to the occasion as befitting an heir to the throne.

    I was thinking "Percy," as in "Blythe Shelley" and "Dovetonsils."

    ;-D

    Parent

    Very rare Percy, over here in the UK at least... (none / 0) (#118)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:27:34 PM EST
    IMBW, but methinks they are gonna have to show noblesse oblige on this so it will be a very British monarchical name. Just looked up the list and Edgar and Edmund aren't so over done as, Henry, Edward, George, William.

    Or could it be... King Stephen II !

    Parent

    I would not bet on Egbert (none / 0) (#108)
    by Towanda on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:58:51 PM EST
    much as it would be nice to revert to names of the real English kings, the Saxons, prior to their conquerors whose dynasties have ruled ever since.  (I only recently refreshed my memory of this, with a fun foray into fine historical fiction on that era.)

    But, as daddy William is named for the first and foremost conqueror, he probably disagrees with me.

    Of course, there are other reasons to not go with Egbert -- or, for that matter, Ethelwulf, Ethelbad, Ethelred, et al.  The kid has enough ahead for him.


    Parent

    Are there any English "Roberts?" (none / 0) (#113)
    by christinep on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:16:02 PM EST
    Scottish, yes... but, English?  It is a strong name.  And, what are the big Welsh names ... thinking of the Duke/Duchess early married life there, the title "Wales" in its several forms for the heir, and the fact that Kate's coal mining grandfather was from Wales.  Thoughts, Towanda?

    Parent
    Robert (none / 0) (#120)
    by Towanda on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:31:51 PM EST
    really is a German name, which would be fitting for the roots of this dynasty.  But shhhhh on that.

    And Charles is a French name, isn't it?

    As for Welsh names, it would be excellent for this baby to be named Dylan, bringing to mind another  Robert.  

    Not going to happen -- nor will Madog, darn it.  King "Mad Dog" would be so cool.  


    Parent

    And Bob's your uncle. Nope, not Robert. (none / 0) (#123)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:04:59 PM EST
    James Robert would be great (5.00 / 3) (#190)
    by Towanda on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:52:07 AM EST
    because he could be King Jim Bob.

    Parent
    He can take whatever royal name (none / 0) (#191)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:06:18 AM EST
    he wants when he takes the throne; his given name does not have to be his royal name.

    But maybe this explains why the royals have so many names - more to choose from if they do want to use one of the given names!

    Parent

    Yes, of course (none / 0) (#192)
    by Towanda on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:47:15 PM EST
    he can.

    Historic royal prerogative, for centuries now.

    Parent

    I'm hoping for Phillip (none / 0) (#96)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:36:01 PM EST
    A nice honor to the great grandfather, Prince Phillip, who has been in and out of the hospital recently.

    Parent
    Apparently (none / 0) (#97)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:37:27 PM EST
    They don't give (first)names of family members still living.

    Parent
    Really! I did not know that. (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:43:11 PM EST
    I always learn something on TL.

    Parent
    I didn't either (none / 0) (#104)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:49:47 PM EST
    Learned it today, in fact!

    Parent
    New odds up (none / 0) (#115)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 05:23:07 PM EST
    Here are the top dozen:

    George 2-1
    James 5-2
    Alexander 8-1
    Louis 11-1
    Henry 12-1
    Arthur 12-1
    Philip 12-1
    Albert 14-1
    David 18-1
    Richard 20-1
    Thomas 20-1
    Spencer 20-1

    Boring (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:30:45 PM EST
    Can't they come up with something very English but not so traditionally royal family?  Or how about a Scottish name?  

    Broderick
    Ian
    Lachlan
    Frederick
    Hamish

    Parent

    I vote for (none / 0) (#136)
    by Zorba on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:33:33 PM EST
    Hamish.  King Hamish?  Why not?     ;-)

    Parent
    Doubt It (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:44:51 PM EST
    Ham ish, maybe for Gene Wilder, or Peter Sellers ...

    Parent
    They might try Scottish to counter secession ! (none / 0) (#140)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:41:09 PM EST
    From this Brits POV... (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:38:15 PM EST
    George...      Seems probable, but so hope not
    James...        Too Scottish... but not Scottish enough to keep 'em
    Alexander...  Nice, but still not Scottish enough to keep 'em
    Louis...         Mon Dieu... jamais !
    Henry...        Uncle Harry's name when fully dressed
    Arthur...       Too mythical and/or ethereal
    Phillip...        Grandpa's still alive, just, so not sure if allowable
    Albert...        Edward VII & George VI were both Alberts & dropped it
    David...         Much too biblical... or sensual if Donatello's
    Richard...      Augers badly, last was a child killer
    Thomas...     Nice but too biblical and King Tom doesn't sound right
    Spencer...     Lady Di's family's surname... NEVER!


    Parent
    I think (none / 0) (#146)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:47:03 PM EST
    Michael has to be in there somewhere (probably not the first name).  It's her father's name.

    Parent
    Michael is 25th (none / 0) (#148)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:50:48 PM EST
    at 40-1

    Parent
    They could call him Mickey for short (none / 0) (#184)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 03:55:29 PM EST
    James....not gonna happen (none / 0) (#154)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:32:47 PM EST
    The things I have learned at TL today! (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by vml68 on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:05:12 PM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    Ditto (none / 0) (#182)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 03:52:01 PM EST
    I guess I haven't been reading enough gossip mags.

    Parent
    Ha! That gossip was years ago when Prince (none / 0) (#185)
    by Angel on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 05:42:56 PM EST
    Harry was born.  You're waaaaaay behind!

    Parent
    This was news to me until maybe a week (none / 0) (#155)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:40:02 PM EST
    ago.

    Royal baby isn't on google news at present.

    Parent

    I see I wasn't alone with this thought! (none / 0) (#156)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:49:40 PM EST
    How sick are we to hear the name James (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:51:27 PM EST
    and immediately go there? And me with my father, brother, and nephew all named James.

    Parent
    I know, I know. (none / 0) (#158)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:54:05 PM EST
    That was my late father-in-law's name and is Mr. Angel's middle name.

    Parent
    James is my conformation name (none / 0) (#162)
    by fishcamp on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:15:32 PM EST
    confirmation name (none / 0) (#163)
    by fishcamp on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:18:17 PM EST
    We knew what you meant! (none / 0) (#164)
    by Angel on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:19:55 PM EST
    Here are some more names (none / 0) (#160)
    by Politalkix on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:11:42 PM EST
    Cameron, Graham, Malcolm, Duncan. Wallace.

    Parent
    Scottish (none / 0) (#174)
    by christinep on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:24:25 PM EST
    ...and, Robert (the Bruce)

    Parent
    I like the name Duncan but... (none / 0) (#181)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 03:50:39 PM EST
    too reminiscent of the Scottish play?

    Parent
    Of course Richard III's reputation is being burnis (none / 0) (#168)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:59:16 PM EST
    as we type!

    Parent
    "burnis" ??? (none / 0) (#170)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:17:25 PM EST
    "Burnished." Seems like (none / 0) (#171)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:19:34 PM EST
    his defenders are quite active after the discovery of his skeleton in the parking lot. But, will the play be as thrilling?

    Parent
    I thought it must be "burnished"... (none / 0) (#173)
    by gbrbsb on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:23:30 PM EST
    but never used the word that way, i.e. polish a reputation !  But I reckon even the world's best PR man would meet his nemesis trying to burnish or rehabilitate him with 2 young princes imprisoned in a tower going missing under his watch!

    Parent
    Have you read Jacqueline Tey's (none / 0) (#176)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:33:40 AM EST
    riff on Richard III?

    (I hope to see Mark Rylance play R III at B.A.M.)

    Parent

    Arthur's a sleeper but I like it. (none / 0) (#126)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:14:16 PM EST
    Arthur is okay (none / 0) (#145)
    by christinep on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:45:50 PM EST
    Guess from comments above, I'll cede on Robert.  (Tho, Bob as in Dylan has always been a favorite.)

    Parent
    Edward? (none / 0) (#150)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:52:41 PM EST
    Not gonna happen (none / 0) (#151)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:54:35 PM EST
    One expert's opinion (none / 0) (#152)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:58:30 PM EST
    But the peculiar British royal tradition of switching between names may complicate matters.

    Prince Charles is expected to be known as King George VII when he ascends to the throne; King George VI was actually christened Albert; and his brother, Edward VIII, who became Duke of Windsor after his 1936 abdication, was known as David by family and friends.

    History has also knocked several male names out of the equation: Edward is unlikely, given that scandalous abdication so he could marry American divorcee Wallis Simpson, and the various King Richards, Charleses and Johns are viewed as cruel, tyrannical or just downright unpopular.

    "Charles, at 10/1, and John, at 8/1, are very unlikely," Roberts wrote. "Charles is already taken as the name of Prince William's father, and John was one of the worst kings in British history." King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta by his nobles in 1215; he was portrayed as the key villain in "Robin Hood."

    British betting on how Kate will deliver "There's no way they would pick Edward as a first name," insists Williams. "And you can't have Henry, after Henry VIII (though of course if Harry came to the throne he would be Henry). My bet is on George Philip William Edward."

    In recent years, there has been a move away from classic "regal" names by those on lower branches of the royal family tree.

    LINK

    Parent

    Digby is on the List (none / 0) (#153)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:58:47 PM EST
    100-1 Digby
    250-1 Sapesan

    Probably will be Alexander

    Parent

    I was about to say, "Hey, look, we CAN all (none / 0) (#125)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:12:15 PM EST
    get along"!  And THEN....!

    Go Figure (none / 0) (#137)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:34:14 PM EST
    The number of babies named Natalee, Caylee and Kyron more than doubled the years those respective tragedies took place.

    Would not be my first instinct regarding naming, but then again naming after the dead is quite popular... maybe tragic death spikes that instinct for some..

    Popularity of the name: (none / 0) (#143)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:43:20 PM EST
    Can find no odds (none / 0) (#167)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 08:58:23 PM EST
    for naming the baby Voldemort

    He would have to be referred to (none / 0) (#175)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:31:44 AM EST
    as "His Royal Highness Prince He-Who-Must-Not Be Named of Cambridge".

    Try monogramming THAT on towels!

    Parent

    Thomas Riddle Windsor? (none / 0) (#183)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 03:53:40 PM EST
    Prince William (none / 0) (#179)
    by indy in sc on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 01:55:49 PM EST
    put the car seat in like a champ!  He must have practiced several times.  So many new parents get tripped up by that, I was surprised he attempted it on camera!

    I was imagining William (none / 0) (#187)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:56:39 AM EST
    practicing that car seat over and over and over, determined not to look like a fool on camera.  Diane Sawyer mentioned it cost only 179Lbs, making it affordable and that it would probably be sold out in all the stores with in hours.

    Parent