Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 16: January-May 2011


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm sorry, but I believe that ACME Corporation already has a sphttp://www.bing.com/images/search?q=wil+e.+coyote&view=detail&id=2BF4311257F2B155F9D5F78FA8C4293C6EF717F3&first=0&qpvt=wil+e.+coyote&FORM=IDFRIRokesperson in Wile E. Coyote.

and there went my monitor. :ROFLMAO:
 
And, IMO, more odious the fact that Kate's brother recited from the pulpit while having nude photos of himself circulating on the 'net as they said "I Do."

Personally, my thoughts watching him at the pulpit was "wow.. he's a good looking man". Ok.. not the exact words I was thinking but.. you get my drift. Is the media trying to put James into a Sarah spot? Well.. one thing, we've not heard any reaction about it from James. Will he be next on Oprah? NOT

OK.. that puts it back on topic. :whistling:
 
And then maybe King Charles will "retire" his brother with a nice fat allowance and Andrew and Sarah can remarry quietly and live out of the spotlight.;)

Perhaps, Sarah, Duchess of York and Prince Andrew, Duke of York shall or might re-marry once Prince Charles ascends the throne.
 
And then maybe King Charles will "retire" his brother with a nice fat allowance and Andrew and Sarah can remarry quietly and live out of the spotlight.;)


It isn't quite that simple for Andrew as he will be a Counsellor of State for at least the next 22 years (allowing for Kate to have twins next year - if only one then add another year on at least).

If Charles and the Queen both die in that time then it will be even longer that Andrew will be a person who can be called upon to carry out the duties of the monarch in the absence of the monarch.
 
Ok.. I've thought about this for a while (and I admit.. it can be dangerous).

Thinking about the segment with Dr. Phil and where he blasted her for being addicted to approval. It really speaks wonders for him that a patient of his that is addicted to approval does it on national TV in front of who knows how many people. Wouldn't a good therapist say 'Sarah.. this is a BAD idea. you're going for approval again?"

Just my thoughts
 
Exactly. Hence my reference to "the Church of Oprah.";)

I think Oprah is now officially playing a role similar to that of the Renaissance Popes - a person who has done bad deeds goes to Oprah for confession, receives absolution and advice (although not much penance - there was certainly chiding).
 
Yes, I know that it's not that simple for Andrew to "disappear." Hence the wink.:flowers:

It isn't quite that simple for Andrew as he will be a Counsellor of State for at least the next 22 years (allowing for Kate to have twins next year - if only one then add another year on at least).
 
Sarah specifically says there were no televisions or radios - but of course, there were telephones. So someone back in England held their phone up to the television so she could hear the wedding.

She never says there were no phones. Not sure why people think every word she utters to Pope Oprah is a lie - when in fact, if it were, we can count on Oprah to catch them!
 
It isn't quite that simple for Andrew as he will be a Counsellor of State for at least the next 22 years (allowing for Kate to have twins next year - if only one then add another year on at least).

If Charles and the Queen both die in that time then it will be even longer that Andrew will be a person who can be called upon to carry out the duties of the monarch in the absence of the monarch.

I do believe that when it comes to the monarchy and what it entails, Charles will have it all in stride and know exactly what needs to be done.

Sarah will not be a part of it and perhaps Andrew relegated to minor duties. Not because of shame or scandal or dislike but he'll be down sizing the monarchy. He's learned for years from the Firm and has seen the need for changes and will adjust to the times.

Sarah and Andrew aren't really part of that problem. The Yorks in the future will be considered cousins and brother still but not really as in a "royal duty" kind of role. At least in the public eye and purse. Councillors of States will exist as the Way Ahead (think I got that right).

I think its gonna be a people's monarchy.
 
The Oprah show sounds pathetic -- Suze Orman giving financial advice to Sarah Ferguson?? It would be hilarious if Sarah wasn't so tragic and self-mutilating. Orman givng Sarah financial advice is sort of like one speaking Mandarin to someone who only understands English.

And please quit calling him "Dr. Phil" Doctor my eye. He does not have a medical degree; I think he may have a bachelor's degree in psychology. He apparently got his PhD from a fourth tier school in Texas and his dissertation was on "Rheumatoid Arthritis." What does that have to do with psychology or psychiatry? Let's just call him "Phil."
 
Last edited:
I do believe that when it comes to the monarchy and what it entails, Charles will have it all in stride and know exactly what needs to be done.

Sarah will not be a part of it and perhaps Andrew relegated to minor duties. Not because of shame or scandal or dislike but he'll be down sizing the monarchy. He's learned for years from the Firm and has seen the need for changes and will adjust to the times.

Sarah and Andrew aren't really part of that problem. The Yorks in the future will be considered cousins and brother still but not really as in a "royal duty" kind of role. At least in the public eye and purse. Councillors of States will exist as the Way Ahead (think I got that right).

I think its gonna be a people's monarchy.

The Cousillors of State are required by law.

They are the people appointed to do the job when the monarch is unavailable e.g. is overseas and are the first four in line over 21. As Andrew will be one of the first four in line until William or Harry have a legitimate child over 21 in the current reign - or two in Charles' reign and three in William's. Even Beatrice will be needed for this role.

This isn't about downsizing who does public royal duties but who does the job of the monarch when the monarch is overseas. There are also two appointed each time - hence the need for four.

To change that situation will require the government to pass new legislation and thus debate matters concerning the royal family - something the royals would really like to avoid as it could lead to all sorts of issues being debated.
 
Last edited:
The Cousillors of State are required by law.

They are the people appointed to do the job when the monarch is unavailable e.g. is overseas and are the first four in line over 21. As Andrew will be one of the first four in line until William or Harry have a legitimate child over 21 in the current reign - or two in Charles' reign and three in William's. Even Beatrice will be needed for this role.

This isn't about downsizing who does public royal duties but who does the job of the monarch when the monarch is overseas. There are also two appointed each time - hence the need for four.

To change that situation will require the government to pass new legislation and thus debate matters concerning the royal family - something the royals would really like to avoid as it could lead to all sorts of issues being debated.

I do think the public role of Andrew will be curtailed substantially once Charles in King. Andrew can continue as CoS, but I suspect you will start to gradually see less and less of Andrew and the York girls at royal occassions.
 
Let's stay on topic...this thread isn't about the role of the Yorks in relations to their work in the BRF.

Its about Sarah's Current Events. Additional off topic posts will be deleted without notice.
 
Last edited:
Does any one know Sarah's US intenerary for the next few weeks?
 
Sarah specifically says there were no televisions or radios - but of course, there were telephones. So someone back in England held their phone up to the television so she could hear the wedding.

She never says there were no phones. Not sure why people think every word she utters to Pope Oprah is a lie - when in fact, if it were, we can count on Oprah to catch them!

Hello PrincessKaimi - I believe that our posters here were responding to rmay's post with regard to lack of communication devices.

I'm not sure that Oprah was going to be catching Sarah's lies - or for that matter, even looking for inconsistencies. This wasn't an interview, like in an actual seeking-answers-to-hard-questions. This was a commercial, prepared by Oprah, for an Oprah product, featuring an Oprah employee (Sarah.) The best construct on it would be an informercial; I haven't made a study of them but it doesn't seem to me that the back and forth of a commercial or an infomercial is designed to elicit anything remotely resembling an interview.

So Finding Sarah has been launched and there is a book pending. It will be interesting if Sarah can reboot her brand, or if this is the coda to her public life. Perhaps that 1986 wedding really was the high-water mark of her life.
 
Hello PrincessKaimi - I believe that our posters here were responding to rmay's post with regard to lack of communication devices.

I'm not sure that Oprah was going to be catching Sarah's lies - or for that matter, even looking for inconsistencies. This wasn't an interview, like in an actual seeking-answers-to-hard-questions. This was a commercial, prepared by Oprah, for an Oprah product, featuring an Oprah employee (Sarah.) The best construct on it would be an informercial; I haven't made a study of them but it doesn't seem to me that the back and forth of a commercial or an infomercial is designed to elicit anything remotely resembling an interview.

So Finding Sarah has been launched and there is a book pending. It will be interesting if Sarah can reboot her brand, or if this is the coda to her public life. Perhaps that 1986 wedding really was the high-water mark of her life.

Yes, that was my mistake - I meant there was no television and internet access, not no telephone access. :flowers:

I rather agree that the "interview" was an "infomercial." But do you know what also struck me? I watched clips of the interview and read a summary on Oprah's website, so maybe I missed something, but did Oprah ever say how the show had changed Sarah or ask Sarah how she had been transformed? The interview was filmed after "Finding Sarah", so presumably Sarah is supposed to have learned something?
 
That guy drives me crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And please quit calling him "Dr. Phil" Doctor my eye. He does not have a medical degree; I think he may have a bachelor's degree in psychology. He apparently got his PhD from a fourth tier school in Texas and his dissertation was on "Rheumatoid Arthritis." What does that have to do with psychology or psychiatry? Let's just call him "Phil."
Thank You..... that guy drives me nuts!:bang:
 
rmay286;1252603 I watched clips of the interview and read a summary on Oprah's website said:
Yes, Oprah did ask that.
" What is the one best thing you have learned from this process that you're still in."
Sarah- Something to the effect of " I need to take a moment to listen to my heart, and hear my authentic voice before I speak."
 
Hello PrincessKaimi - I believe that our posters here were responding to rmay's post with regard to lack of communication devices.

I'm not sure that Oprah was going to be catching Sarah's lies - or for that matter, even looking for inconsistencies. This wasn't an interview, like in an actual seeking-answers-to-hard-questions. This was a commercial, prepared by Oprah, for an Oprah product, featuring an Oprah employee (Sarah.) The best construct on it would be an informercial; I haven't made a study of them but it doesn't seem to me that the back and forth of a commercial or an infomercial is designed to elicit anything remotely resembling an interview.

So Finding Sarah has been launched and there is a book pending. It will be interesting if Sarah can reboot her brand, or if this is the coda to her public life. Perhaps that 1986 wedding really was the high-water mark of her life.

I'm sorry - I was joking about Oprah's real ability to "catch lies". I'm the one who claims that Opran is the modern Pope - she sells her beneficience to Sarah and to her audience. That's what her audience has come to expect.

But Sarah did not lie about not having a telephone - she never said she didn't have one. I think Sarah looked as if she was trying very hard to understand what was going on in the interview (I felt badly for Sarah - she and Oprah both know it's an infomercial, but it's an infomercial in which both the subject, Sarah, and Oprah, have agreed Sarah has to publicly state that she screwed up her whole life, has no sense of self, feels terrible about herself every day of her life, etc.

Of course the wedding was the highwater mark, it already was - but the show made sure we saw it. Oprah's audience contains a lot of fifty-somethings, whose great moments of glory are in their past. Oprah herself is "retiring," (I hear she wants to do a show on Broadway) and Oprah alone will be the person who emerges from the Oprah Kingdom as someone who can continue to have glorious moments.

Sarah's show (they showed a brief clip) certainly contains much more dramatic footage than the interview (if the clip is representative, there's going to be quite a bit of crying). It's possible that the brief clips of Sarah and her two daughters are from the show (where they are clinging to her and she's petting them).

I too was responding to posters here who were trying to insist that Sarah was openly lying about something as mundane as phones in Thailand. She seems lost, but still spunky, but basically heartbroken. She also looked really different in that clip where she's selling favors (boy, was that awful) than she on the show, I think the main point of Sarah's new endeavors is to get out of the freefall that scandal caused (it was only a year ago) and Oprah is glad to make money off of Sarah's need to rise in public esteem.

If only for her daughters (I hear the rumor that Beatrice might want to be a fashion designer), Sarah needs to remove a bit of the tarnish. Did she? I'd say that in terms of the American Oprah audience (a group of people who are all around me, but whom I do not completely understand), yes, yes she did. Oprah knows how to do it: put the scandal up front, give a several "therapeutic" moments with Not-Dr. Phil and Suze (and herself: "Sarah is broken and needs to be broken open.") Now Sarah is better (according to Oprah).
 
...

Now Sarah is better (according to Oprah).

Well heavens! :flowers:

If Oprah said Sarah's better....!

But I agree with your assessment that it would be good for Sarah to remove some of the tarnish, for the sake of her daughters. Her moment has (long) past, and launching them is a better use of her resources. Having said that....they are pretty much launched.
 
The Oprah show sounds pathetic -- Suze Orman giving financial advice to Sarah Ferguson?? It would be hilarious if Sarah wasn't so tragic and self-mutilating. Orman givng Sarah financial advice is sort of like one speaking Mandarin to someone who only understands English.

And please quit calling him "Dr. Phil" Doctor my eye. He does not have a medical degree; I think he may have a bachelor's degree in psychology. He apparently got his PhD from a fourth tier school in Texas and his dissertation was on "Rheumatoid Arthritis." What does that have to do with psychology or psychiatry? Let's just call him "Phil."

Would you marry me?
 
I can not stand Oprah, and Dr. Phil is even worse!!! A couple of self-absorbed, self-righteous leeches who take themselves WAY TOO seriously. It's too bad Sarah allows herself to be exploited by these two phonies. I suppose there aren't alot of media outlets clammoring for her to guest on their shows, so maybe this is the best she can get. I don't know. She'd be far wiser, however, to keep her distance. Neither are doing her any favors. I wish she would retreat to the countryside where she could write or paint and lead a relatively low-key lifestyle. Unfortunately, I don't think a low-key lifestyle is what she's looking for, and that's too bad.


Once again Bella we agree...HOLY GOD..Dr Phil, Suze Orman(who by the way gives excellent financial advice) and Oprah??!

I can imagine this unholy trinity of New Age, self-involved naval gazing feeling very superior that they have been called upon to "advise" the mother of the Queen's grandchildren.

Sarah, really, really needs to get a grip and stop allowing herself to become an embarrassment and a laughingstock, all at once. :bang:
 
Yes, Oprah did ask that.
" What is the one best thing you have learned from this process that you're still in."
Sarah- Something to the effect of " I need to take a moment to listen to my heart, and hear my authentic voice before I speak."
She's done that all her life and look where it's gotten her.
I'd love to believe she CAN change however I've seen enough of this pattern throughout her life to where I am afraid Russo is taking a pessimistic view of the Duchess and any type "recovery" she may try and undertake.
 
Russophile, Sarah has begun to specialize in the type of self-involved "Oprahspeak" that you quote above.

When Oprah had her on after the "cash for access" mess, she asked Sarah what she could take away from it and Sarah came back with "self-love and acceptance". :bang: I. KID. YOU. NOT. I wanted to scream.

Sarah York is one of the best things to have happened to the Oprah franchise but for Sarah, the reverse is true...it's a never ending train wreck.

I can no longer watch when she appears on that show..I am too embarrassed for her.
 
BP must have experts in dealing with public opinion and dealing with damaged reputations. Prince Charles and Camilla have come a long way in earning the public's respect. PA will obviously do anything to help Sarah. Why hasn't he brought in some of the experts to help both Sarah and himself?

I realize that Oprah is paying Sarah big money and getting Sarah's name out there...which she needs to rebuild her career. From everything that I have read on the board about Sarah's interview...it seems to be all about poor Sarah. She may have gained some more sympathy, but it doesn't sound like she has gained back one ounce of respect.
 
I just read and watched what I could on the Sarah show on Oprah.
(You can find it here: Sarah Ferguson - the Duchess of York - Oprah.com )
IMO, this is all self-serving to Sarah. Even though Oprah told her "It's not always about you Sarah." This show IS. I could see Sarah brighten up when she "finally got a label" on what was wrong with her. Most normal people go into treatment and don't hang their laundry out in the public like this. This is rather self-serving and I don't see Sarah getting better because of it. Really.
I think one of the big disappointments of this video was when Sarah said that PA actually ENCOURAGED her to go on Oprah. Sure, let's stick it to the BRF in yet another way. Holy Moly! This whole thing really makes me ill.
 
If he has a Ph.D., he's qualified to use the title Doctor. That said, I don't like the way that he manipulates people for dramatic effect. I was horrified by the "Dr. Phil House."


And please quit calling him "Dr. Phil" Doctor my eye. He does not have a medical degree; I think he may have a bachelor's degree in psychology. He apparently got his PhD from a fourth tier school in Texas and his dissertation was on "Rheumatoid Arthritis."
 
Mermaid1962 I have a friend who is a psychologist...so she knows people who do know "Dr" Phil.

My understanding is that he is in NO WAY licensed to either give psychiatric counseling or prescribe meds.

The things she told me about Phil McGraw as a human being surprised and saddened me.:ermm:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom