Harry and Meghan: Wedding Suggestions and Musings

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by wyevale

I fully expect the least controversial choice will be the one taken.. NO Presidents [current or ex] will be invited..
Why mess up a special day for the tawdry consideration of politicians ?

From the BBC News site today.

Donald Trump 'not aware' of any royal wedding invite - BBC News

[M. Payton]

I agree with you, the Foundation is not political yet the man is for he is still involved with the Democratic Party so therefore in a sense he is still a political figure even though he is not elected to office at the moment. He commands attention world wide for his political views and is seen on the media circus and talk shows giving his political views. It would be difficult to separate him from side of him to the other IMHO.

Even former president Clinton is a political figure as he still is involved in politics with his wife no less. Guess once they leave office and the gov it follows them wherever they go...

[Pranter]

Jimmy Carter is still a political figure. He's been out of office for decades.


LaRae

[Osipi]

Even after leaving office, former presidents are still addressed as President. That tells a mouthful right there.

Even for Charles and Diana's wedding, which was a huge, full blown state affair, President Reagan did not attend although his wife, Nancy, did. Nancy also attended Sarah and Andrew's wedding. Obama, then the sitting president of the US, was not invited to William's wedding and that was a semi-state wedding.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

If he wants to invite the Obamas as friends then o see no problem with it; it is based on a personal relationship not on official work. And nobody knows what kind of relationship Harry has with them just because we see them together only when it's official business doesn't mean that's the only time they associate; we don't know these peoples lives.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

If he wants to invite the Obamas as friends then o see no problem with it; it is based on a personal relationship not on official work. And nobody knows what kind of relationship Harry has with them just because we see them together only when it's official business doesn't mean that's the only time they associate; we don't know these peoples lives.

An invitation may be based solely on personal friendship but the political implications will always be there. As it seems that there has never been a US president (past or current) that has attended a British royal wedding, that leads me to believe that political inferences are being avoided and to me, that seems wise.

Harry and Meghan may choose to skirt around this issue by having just Michelle Obama attend the wedding. It seems like this was the route taken previously even for a full blown, all out state wedding.

[AlowVera]

It is being reported that Meghan will give a speech at the wedding reception in tribute to her husband, family and friends. Instead of her father who is intensely private giving a speech, Meghan will step in. I'm not familiar with royal receptions, is the Bride allowed to give a speech? It won't be televised but I would love to hear her words about Prince Harry.

[Pranter]

I wouldn't put much stock in what the tabloids are saying is going to go on at the wedding.


LaRae

[AlowVera]

It came from The Sunday Times royal reporter.

[Pranter]

You think Harry and Meghan are telling the Sunday Times reporters their wedding details?


LaRae

[Madame Verseau]

The bride giving a speech at the reception is a more recent American wedding custom. I figured some elements of an American wedding would be incorporated. I wouldn't be surprised Meghan wears a garter but it won't get tossed.

[Skippyboo]

Originally Posted by Osipi

An invitation may be based solely on personal friendship but the political implications will always be there. As it seems that there has never been a US president (past or current) that has attended a British royal wedding, that leads me to believe that political inferences are being avoided and to me, that seems wise.



Harry and Meghan may choose to skirt around this issue by having just Michelle Obama attend the wedding. It seems like this was the route taken previously even for a full blown, all out state wedding.

The only state wedding for the last 50 years was the wedding of Charles and Diana. It was a state occasion because Charles was heir apparent. The US President at the time was Ronald Reagan who got shot in the months prior to the wedding. So Mrs Reagan just went. We don’t know if the President would have went if he wasn’t recovering from the shooting.

[M. Payton]

Originally Posted by Pranter

You think Harry and Meghan are telling the Sunday Times reporters their wedding details?


LaRae

Now that got a chuckle out of me.....maybe the Sunday Times Reporter could plan the entire wedding and then give the details to Harry and Meghan so all they have to do is show up........ anybody that believes the media in anything, I have the crown jewels sitting on my dresser here to wear for the day...........

[AlowVera]

Originally Posted by Pranter

You think Harry and Meghan are telling the Sunday Times reporters their wedding details?


LaRae

No, but Roya Nikkah and the Sunday Times are a good royal source. They broke the story about BP preparing for the royal engagement. Believe what you will. Stories from the Sunday Times have more weight because they are not a gossip tabloid. As always take everything with a grain of salt. But some sources have a better track record and Sunday Times is a more trust worthy periodical than most.

[Pranter]

A broken clock is right twice a day.




LaRae

[Abbigail]

Originally Posted by Osipi

An invitation may be based solely on personal friendship but the political implications will always be there. As it seems that there has never been a US president (past or current) that has attended a British royal wedding, that leads me to believe that political inferences are being avoided and to me, that seems wise.

Harry and Meghan may choose to skirt around this issue by having just Michelle Obama attend the wedding. It seems like this was the route taken previously even for a full blown, all out state wedding.

And there are no political implications of a continued working relationship between a royal and former president? Sorry but I'm still confused why there is more concern over a wedding invite than Harry making a deliberate effort to maintain a connection (working or otherwise) with a former politician. The latter absolutely has more political implications than a wedding invite. Said invite seems to only have political implications because a current president may be offended and I can't say enough how ridiculous that is to me.

[Countessmeout]

Yes, Obama and Trump are both political figures, no one is debating that. But there is a difference that is being pointed out. And its not the obvious one, that one is president and one is former.

Obama and Harry have worked together. With the IG. And now with Obama's new projects. They actually have a relationship even if a working one.

vs

Trump is simply president. Harry met Melania once but not Trump. They have no actual connection. If Trump was invited, it would be simply as president.

If you are going to invite Trump, simply as president of the US, then other heads of state of trading partners should be invited. Obama on the other hand is not being invited (if he is) because he is the former president. He is being/maybe invited because of a working relationship with Harry. This is the obvious differentiation.

Its like inviting the Trudeaus or not. They would be invited not because Justin is PM, they would be invited inspite of that. They would be invited due to the relationship between Sophie and Meghan.


Besides working with a former president does not have the same implications as a sitting president. There is no concern of undue influence put by the president 'due to friendship' on a member of the royal family.

Co-workers are just that, co-workers and they are the people who work on the job with the friend whom ever that is, they to me are not personal friends that come to say my home for dinner or to play cards or Monopoly or shot the breeze over wine or beer.......Harry has the type of personality I think where he enjoys the events and loves getting out there meeting people and helping, yet after the event it is home to peace and quiet and calm and a loved one, cooking dinner, or take out whatever the case may be..........seriously doubt if he brings co-workers home with him to have dinner or play video games. I would like to think that would be his *private time for family and very close personal friends only*, not co-workers, business people or even staff that works on all the back up work for the charities. Even royals need *private time alone* to gather their strength to take on the next event and read all the info before hand.

That's you and good for you.

Many people think beyond who they would play video games with. As mature adults, many of us see we have different parts of our life. Work, home life, family, friends, and they are all important. It is very common when you have a larger wedding, to invite co-workers and other people like that. No you aren't going to invite your hairdresser, but the person you work with and have raport with. As we saw with Prince William, there were not just the required guests (the royals, the heads of commonwealth and such), family and friends. There were also people William knew through his charity work and his military time. Do you think celebrities like the Beckhams are personal friends? No. I would be shocked to not see some for Harry.

Even with the extended Windsor family and Meghan's family that will be invited, that's maybe 150 people. Plenty of room for friends, co-workers and such. I see no one debating Meghan will invite some of her Suits co-workers. I don't see how that is different.

[Abbigail]

Are you disagreeing with me on something because I'm a little confused? I would agree with your assessment and I don't think anything I stated contradicts that.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I hope Harry decides to wear a ring

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Yes, Obama and Trump are both political figures, no one is debating that. But there is a difference that is being pointed out. And its not the obvious one, that one is president and one is former.

Obama and Harry have worked together. With the IG. And now with Obama's new projects. They actually have a relationship even if a working one.

vs

Trump is simply president. Harry met Melania once but not Trump. They have no actual connection. If Trump was invited, it would be simply as president.

If you are going to invite Trump, simply as president of the US, then other heads of state of trading partners should be invited. Obama on the other hand is not being invited (if he is) because he is the former president. He is being/maybe invited because of a working relationship with Harry. This is the obvious differentiation.

I don't disagree with what you said, but we must approach the situation pragmatically. If Obama is invited and Trump is not, it will create a diplomatic embarrassment for the British government, because Trump will take it personally, whether it is justified or not. Justin Trudeau's being invited, either as the Canadian PM or simply as a friend of the bride, doesn't really matter because the US press will ignore it and Trump won't care. I'm sorry to say that, but Americans are self-centered and inward-looking; they don't care about anything that doesn't have a direct connection with the United States or other Americans.

The most pragmatic solution to avoid any embarrassment is not to invite either Trump or Obama. In any case, I don't think that Harry or even Meghan for that matter are that close personally to the Obamas to merit an invitation to their wedding. Having worked with them in certain social projects doesn't mean they are close friends. The Trudeaus are a different situation since they seem to belong to Meghan's social circle.