Queen Elizabeth II

Queen of the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth realms from 6 February 1952 until her death in 2022 Website

Approval Rate: 61%

61%Approval ratio

Reviews 49

Sort by:
  • by


    Tue Jun 12 2012

    Obviously I prefer the first Queen Elizabeth. My Bess had the body of weak woman but the heart and stomach of a king. This one was a pale version who couldn't control her unruly family. It saddens me that the British royal family has become fodder for tabloid tv shows. Now they have put the queen's soiled knickers for $5,000 on e-bay. If it was me, I would throw the wanker to the Tower for violating her majesty's sacred temple. I hope Prince William protects his Kate from these vultures. I bet the Americans(or Canucks) would pay big money for her silk bras or even her used tampon. Update: The mystery eBay bidder paid $18,000 for Liz's soiled knickers. Can we say sick granny complex???? Update 2: Here are some fun facts about Liz's soiled knickers from TMZ: The pair of panties came in to the possession of a famous Miami playboy named "Baron" Joseph de Bicske Dobronyi -- or Sepy, as he was known. As the story goes, Sepy got them from a friend after they were left ... Read more

  • by


    Mon Jun 04 2012

    your royal highness!!!! this is the 21st century and uk is still into royal crown huh. the prince? hasn't done craps... job qualification?......umbilical cord from any royal highness i suppose. then that's how easy it is too be rich..without any skills. must be cool huh. vote and decide...thanx... http://wat-up-people.blogspot.com

  • by


    Mon Jun 04 2012

    God forbid the English ever bannish this looney institution and lose touch with their fundamental eccentricity.  Elizabeth is doing the best she can as a living symbol of their heritage as one of the greatest colonial empires the world ever knew. She's the last bastion of the feudal system in the age of the disposal digital experience.  Once she is gone, there will be no touchstone to anything that can't be deleted and forgotten.  The Matrix will be here.

  • by


    Mon Jun 04 2012

    I'm not particularly impressed by the titular head of the most famous dysfunctional family in the world.

  • by


    Mon Jun 04 2012

    Updated due to Dimond Jubilee-60 Years on the Throne I will state from the ousted that although I'm not a fan of everything she does and how her family is, I will admit there is a small part of admiration for her and what she has achieved. To start off I will be straight by saying that she does a hell of allot more than some people will have you believe!! She is the head of state for 16 countries. (The Commonwealth.) She and her family brings in more than 160 million pounds just in tourism, which is around $250 million US dollars a year. (US brings in about $970 million a year.) She passes legislation in all 16 countries. She is neutral politically and that is why she can act if the people so ask of her, she can veto government if government is found to be ineffective. The Queen also has a special relationship with the Prime Minister, retaining the right to appoint and also meeting with him or her on a regular basis. She is responsible for the UK Forces and war can only be declared by... Read more

  • by


    Tue Jun 14 2011

    I heard her and Rothschilds's are reptillian shape shifters lol... No, but really when is she going to croak

  • by


    Tue Sep 30 2008

    I wrote to her to tell her about the secret family courts but she never replied. Doesn't say a lot, does she?

  • by


    Thu Jul 17 2008

    Chris from Great Britain says "I admire and respect you Ma'am.  Oh and please don't worry about those upperty former colonies" Long live the Queen

  • by


    Thu Feb 21 2008

    As Pointless as most think she is.and speaking as an american,that has lived in the uk most my life and whose family is british.The queen has been at least one of the binding factors of the country. The UK Needs to be held together now more than ever. So many people complain, Scotland, England, Wales and N.Ireland all included. We are all to blame. Let's get out of this pitiful state we are in of post war guilt. We should be proud of what we have, not what we think we should be ashamed of. After all, it is a free country.Edited for Typos..

  • by


    Thu Nov 08 2007

    She has always thought of her country first.

  • by


    Sun Nov 04 2007

    Disgraceful waste of money and space.

  • by


    Thu Aug 16 2007

    i believe that having the royal family is pointless. These people are not better than the rest of us. they are just regular lucky people whose (as one of the previous comments stated) family in the past killed thousands of people with unjustice. By applauding the royal family, I believe that we are also applauding all the injustices and killings that the royal families have committed against their people, which is not fair. These people were just lucky to be born in royalty but they could've also be born just like us. They are useless

  • by


    Thu May 31 2007

    Devoted to Britain and the Commonwealth. Unchanging in her sense of propriety and dignity. An outstanding Head of State by any measure.

  • by


    Thu May 03 2007

    I'm much more fond of the boat than I am of this vulture and her brood.

  • by


    Sun Mar 04 2007

    I completely agree with Genghis, but he forgot to mention one point in her favor. As we saw in "The Naked Gun," Elizabeth II throws a wicked screwball.

  • by


    Sun Mar 04 2007

    Where is Oliver Cromwell when you need him? This reign has gone on and on. She must be trying for the record. We need some new blood in her queendom.

  • by


    Sat Mar 03 2007


  • by


    Mon Dec 11 2006

    The Queen is a useless pile of crap. And is of no use to anyone. I believe she should be slaughtered in her sleep, along with all of her family. I Also think the user below is an idiot, as I know that he believes that the queen is useles also.

  • by


    Tue Nov 28 2006

    Not a flashy monarch, Liz Windsor carries out the job she was trained for with dedication and competence. She lacks the easygoing manner of her mother but unlike her husband and her children, she has steered clear of controversy. A woman with over 54 years experience, she has dealt with ten prime ministers, from Churchill to Blair. Not an icon like her historical namesake Elizabeth I (known as "Gloriana"), who presided over the golden era of Shakespeare and the defeat of the Spanish Armada in the 1500's, her role as a constitutional monarch is limited many routine tasks dressed up with pomp and ceremony. She was born into a life of privilege, which many consider a relic of a bygone era. However, her country chooses to keep this institution and expect her to perform competently. That is exactly what she has done for over a half century. She has exceptionally good health for a woman of over eighty. She represents one of the longest running shows on the planet. Good job, your Majesty.

  • by


    Fri Oct 13 2006

    the queens decision is final you have no right to downgrade her fabulous decisions are final I hope all you who gave her less than a 5 rot in hell like the republican scum you are rule Britannia rule Britannia rule Britannia.

  • by


    Tue Nov 08 2005

    Horse face Liz is just a lucky old woman whose ancestors killed others in order to grab possessions and power. Nothing special about that - she is not a god. She wears gloves when she has to touch "her public" as if she might catch something contageous from them. Has this woman got a serious Howard Hughes complex or what? All the fortune she has amassed, and it is considerable, is not the result of honest labour. The fact is she is just a priviledged sponger who has never done a real day's work in her life. As for tourism, is France or Italy, or USA even, short of tourists? If the few cretinous people who visit Britain just to catch sight of a royal are lost forever, would anyone care? What an insult to Britain and to all those intelligent people who visit not to wave at the queen but to actually see the country. I suspect the days of the royals lording it over their "subjects" will soon be over. Not many people under the age of 60 have any time for them now.

  • by


    Fri Oct 28 2005

    Reading some of the other reviews I am baffled at the complete short sightedness of most of them. The Queen, the royal family probably bring 10 times more money then they cost. Tourisim people tourisim. Any one can have Palaces and Castles but with out royality they are just old big buildings. Also it keeps the country closer to its history while retaining the worlds perception of Britain.

  • by


    Wed Oct 26 2005

    may she reign forever ! how can anyone criticize her for her lifetime of loyalty and duty to the crown of england ?

  • by


    Sun Oct 23 2005

    She has kept the Royal family going, which I'm not sure is a good thing. She has performed her responsbilities with dignity. What a shame for her to be surrounded by such a gaggle of clowns.

  • by


    Sat Oct 15 2005

    Brenda, the Sex Pistols said it all..."No Future..." etc Richest woman in the world- disgraceful! Give it all to the National Health Service and retire to the Outer Hebrides. For God's sake woman get a grip - tell that big grown up lump of a son of yours to get a job! And as for your husband! How does he see through all that prejudice and myopic world view! That man's a testament to the imbecility resulting from royal in-breeding. For goodness sake have him shot. God save you mam...definitely not, goddamn you more like it Mrs Windsor or should we say Frau Vindsor!

  • by


    Thu May 19 2005

    She and Sir Elton John are Britain's oldest queens. But seriously folks, she always comes off stately and poised no matter how bad the Royal scandal. I recall her stating the year 1997 -- with Princess Di's death, a fire in Buckingham Palace [where she bravely kept going back into the burning palace to retrieve precious artifacts] and the mauling death of her prized Corgis by wild animals -- was her Annus Horribus. We can all relate to our own personal Annus Horribus.

  • by


    Thu May 19 2005

    shes a lady set in her ways and i bet she makes camillas life miserable now that shes married to charles. i dont think the queen would be satisfied or like anyone her sons married. but she should be grateful somebody wanted charles cuz not only is he an idiot hes an ugly idiot as well

  • by


    Wed Apr 27 2005

    Her most Britannic majesty Queen Elizabeth II has stood by her coronation oath to place her country and empire first. Probably will become one of the most respected monarchs of modern times, too bad the same could not be said of some of her offspring!

  • by


    Wed Apr 13 2005

    Come on people lets get more terrible ratings of the queen in The only people who love her are senile old ladies and the BNP! and as for the tourism argument, people don't come to Britain to see the queen!!! and as for the monarchs being a part of British History, yes they are so is the plague and the great fire of london whoopie de doo its time for a change. I call for the public neutering of all the monarchy!!

  • by


    Thu Mar 31 2005

    According to my friends in britain, they don't give a dam about the royal family either, that they are leaches on society just collecting taxes after taxes for doing absolutely nothing.

  • by


    Sun Mar 20 2005

    man i dont know much about her but that BEOTCH is lucky as a mug to be so richhhhh

  • by


    Sat Feb 19 2005

    I do personally think that she deserves props.. shes cool

  • by


    Sat Feb 12 2005

    I hate to break it to any Brits here, but there are very few Americans interested in the British Royalty are stay-at-home parents, historians, and obdurate diplomats. Oh yes, and let us not forget those all important tabloids, and news anchors with nothing better to do. Public polls indicate that less than 20% of Americans give a darn about the Royal Family. Due to the very little information available about her here in the States, I'm giving her a neutral rating.

  • by


    Fri Jan 28 2005

    I have nothing to say about this woman personally, but rather the entire system that she represents. Maybe someone can explain it to me. Don't these people (the Royal Family) function essentially as parasites on the host-country where they reside, sucking the lifeblood and vitality out of its people like some aged, decrepit tapeworm? What do any of the Royals do to justify their livelihoods, their cushy existence? Do they work? Are they entertainers? Do they produce anything? Are we still using that timeworn canard about them helping to promote tourism? And if the British aren't bad enough in their slavish devotion to these high-class wastrels, what in the name of God is the allure of these Royals that so appeals to people in America? This almost compulsive fascination with Prince Harry, and Charlie (Alfred E. Newman look-alike), and Princess Di, and Fergie...Is it that our lives are so empty and meaningless that we obsess over any soap-opera banality that is presented to us? Oh well, ... Read more

  • by


    Sun Oct 24 2004

    long live the queen

  • by


    Mon Sep 13 2004

    Seems like a decent person but points off for raising an idiot.

  • by


    Thu Sep 02 2004

    She ruined the monarchy. No monarch with ever a bit brain in their head would let the House of Lords Act 99 go through.

  • by


    Fri Aug 27 2004

    God save our gracious Queen, Long live our noble Queen, God save the Queen! Send her victorious, Happy and glorious, Long to reign over us; God save the Queen! O Lord our God arise, Scatter her enemies And make them fall; Confound their politics, Frustrate their knavish tricks, On Thee our hopes we fix, God save us all! Thy choicest gifts in store On her be pleased to pour; Long may she reign; May she defend our laws, And ever give us cause To sing with heart and voice, God save the Queen! Not in this land alone, But be God's mercies known, From shore to shore! Lord make the nations see, That men should brothers be, And form one family, The wide world over. From every latent foe, From the assassins blow, God save the Queen! O'er her thine arm extend, For Britain's sake defend, Our mother, prince, and friend, God save the Queen! a true patriot. you go Lizzy! i like the sort of nostalgia of it all, she dont rule the country but hey what does that matter its just a bit of fun!

  • by


    Sun Aug 15 2004

    As for the tourism argument I doubt that most of the people travelling to the UK are going there just to see these assholes. You wouldn't find them anyway. People come to look at the historical items. That doesn't mean that the past and present should be confused. The UK is a relatively benign area of the world because of its history ( from which people HAVE learned some lessons ) and the character of its people. The monarchy is just a fly buzzing around a horse's head. It's time to get out the bug spray!

  • by


    Thu Aug 12 2004

    All monarchs must fall. Anarchy in the UK right now!

  • by


    Fri Jul 23 2004

    Parasite in Chief of an iniquitous system.

  • by


    Tue Jun 08 2004

    she is a pain in the neck ! i dont like her

  • by


    Tue May 18 2004

    Not loved or respected, traits she bred into Charlie as well. Too bad, a good and loved Queen can do wonderful things in the world (like Di started to do...) Diana would have changed (and personally touched) many, many lives. This one touches her own wealth at most.

  • by


    Sun Apr 18 2004

    I dont mean to sound unpatriotic, but what exactly does the queen do? What's her purpose, and do we really need a royal family at all? Her main function seems to be her ability to wave. I could be completly wrong, but she seems fairly pointless.

  • by


    Mon Mar 22 2004

    A hugely greedy and mean woman who's happily sat back on to watch the dosh roll in. Up until she accessed the throne the British monarchy paid tax. However, in a deal with the then government, they came up with a scam to let her off the hook. She's also cunning and has a system in place that no one person knows her exact wealth, only what certain elements are worth like her collection of rare stamps, her properties, her valuable works of art etc. She just does enough to make it look like she's working - e.g. shaking hands with some poor saps in Africa - but has never had to break sweat. At one time she pretty much said she rules by divine right. Worse still are the sycophants the length and breadth of the country that keep her on the throne. Halfwitted forelock tuggers who still believe in the Empire. These people make me want to throw up.

  • by


    Sun Jan 11 2004

    her position is completely unnecessary and she is nothing but a figurehead. has about as much power or clout as the u.n.

  • by


    Mon Dec 08 2003

    It has been a really long time since England was last ruled by a monarch. This tradition of keeping the monarchy alive eludes me, but if the British government wants to use taxpayers dollars(pounds,quid,whatever) to keep the royal family rich then more power to them. The people have to decide when enough is enough.

  • by


    Mon Dec 01 2003

    Just another social maggot on the public dole taking up space while her country has fallen to third world status since the end of WWII. The English are a pinheaded people to continue to endure the vagaries, excesses and wastefulness of a monarchy that does little more than eat well, drink well, dress well, live in sumptuous residences and go on costly vacations, all at taxpayer expense. Just what practical good use do these freeloaders provide to the English people? Supply the crappy London tabloids with gossip items that have been become as exciting as a paper cup? Even the shock value of such trivial inconsequential crap has worn off over the years. To maintain an enduring tradition? What good is a tradition of classism, exclusion, idleness, drunkeness, conspicuous consumption and marital infidelity? What great values to enfranchise out of the public pocket!!! I say, retire the English monarchy already, as the figurehead serves absolutely no useful purpose, and sell off the c... Read more

  • by


    Sat Nov 29 2003

    Hey, she gets five stars simply because she had the good taste to select the most wonderful breed of dog on the face of the earth - the Welsh corgi! Aside from that, she also seems to be truly dedicated to British tradition in its best form and a genuinely decent person. I could be wrong though - it's not as though we've ever had tea and discussed these matters. (o;