classy

[Bob]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1329858,00.html

oh ohio you silly loons

Have you not noticed that Americans don't give two shits what Europeans think of us? Each email someone gets from some arrogant Brit telling us why to NOT vote for George Bush is going to backfire, you stupid, yellow-toothed pansies ... I don't give a rat's ass if our election is going to have an effect on your worthless little life. I really don't. If you want to have a meaningful election in your crappy little island full of shitty food and yellow teeth, then maybe you should try not to sell your sovereignty out to Brussels and Berlin, dipshit. Oh, yeah - and brush your goddamned teeth, you filthy animals.
Wading River, NY

[nines]

This one makes me laugh:
I used to visit the UK every year. I love the history and culture of your country. But after I heard about your campaign to influence our elections, I've decided that neither myself, nor my family will ever visit again. I'm offended by your campaign and because of it, I'm remembering more of the negative aspects I've seen in the UK than the positive ones. Though I still love the castles!
Detroit
Wah wah, you tried to tell me what to do so fuck you and your foggy, old island. OOOOO, LOOK AT THE PRETTY CASTLES!
WHAT the fuck?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

People are STRANGE.

[Ace42]

I think the volume of animosity towards their "greatest allies" and the second biggest contingent in the "coalition of the willing" says it all. "We don't want or need your help" - oh, except for our army, which the US government is desperately trying to second.

Ignorant backwards plebs. No wonder arabs want to bomb them - it's not terrorism, it's an attempt to eliminate congenital disorder.

MAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE A TOOTH CAPPED. I UNDERSTAND IT TAKES AT LEAST 18 MONTHS FOR YOUR GREAT MEDICAL SERVICES TO GET AROUND TO YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY.
Harlan, Kentucky

I had to have a tooth capped and another crowned after a nasty face-floor accident, and it took a couple of weeks. Not bad considering it had to be manufcatured specifically to fit me and be colour matched, etc.

And what is the obsession with our teeth? It is rednecks who have slack-jaws, a la cletus in the Simpsons. Barring said cap and crown, I have never had any dental surgery whatsoever. Or is plasma-whitening something that citizens as well as actors have?

As a US citizen, I want to advise you that you and anyone that participates in subverting the US presidential election can be criminally charged and perhaps even charged as spies.
California

How is discussing politics "subverting" ? Surely the preface "As a moron who is less informed than most UK teenagers" would've been more apt than "US citizen" ?

Fascinatin article, and it just goes to prove my suspicions about the US. As much as I get told off about making generalisations about US citizens, check the numbers and tell me that there isn't something in it.

In the spirit of the Declaration of Independence's pledge to show "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind", we have come up with a unique way for non-Americans to express your views on the policies and candidates in this election to some of the people best placed to decide its outcome.

http://guardian.assets.digivault.co.uk/clark_county/

"Well, fuck it, we're rednecks from clark county, we know more about the Declaration of Independence that the words in it say!"

[Bob]

i mean, i understand their point, i'll admit it's a little offensive that people from other countries are trying to influence our undecided voters, but geez...some people

[Ace42]

Offensive? I think that merely highlights the isolationist nature of individuals. Backwards uninformed morons who don't even know the implication of their own goddamn declaration of independance. Personally I think that having letters explaining why they do not deserve to have a vote in anything other than a local parish bake-sale would be more than justified. If anything, the US recipients should be honoured that people took the time to put more thought into a correspondance than they clearly have in the last 15 years of their lives.

[DroppinScience]

i mean, i understand their point, i'll admit it's a little offensive that people from other countries are trying to influence our undecided voters, but geez...some people

I think it's more people finding it offensive that non-Americans are bashing THEIR candidate.

Michael Moore told Canada to NOT vote Conservative in our national election in June. I've got no problem with him saying that, since I'd rather have an enema than to vote for those fuckwads.

HOWEVER, I could see people who were gonna vote Conservative go: "What's with this foreigner tellin' us what do do?!?!?!"

I could see myself being irked with Bruce Willis if he ever went and said: "I hope you Canadians vote for the Conservatives... or I'm gonna be disappointed in you!"

:p

[nines]

I think the only people who could be so taken aback by words from abroad are those people who are probably already ignorant enough to be voting for Bush anyway. So someone tried to tell you what to do? No, wait, some FOREIGNER tried to tell you what to do? Well, *gasp* fuck those fucking terrorists, I'll just go vote for GWB and he'll take care of them. THEY NEED TO MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS BECAUSE IF NOT WE'LL COME OVER THERE AND BOMB THEIR ASSES TOO!
Seriously, though, people ARE retarded.

[ASsman]

i'll admit it's a little offensive that people from other countries are trying to influence our undecided voters, but geez...some people
I think The Daily Show said it best when they found all these undecided voters, placed them all in the same room and screamed questions at them. Something along the lines of " HOW WERE YOU ABLE TO TIE YOUR SHOES TODAY!?" " YOU CAN'T PICK A CANIDATE?!!" "WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE, IT's LIKE DAY AND NIGHT?!?!", "JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!" . I can't find the exact transcript, if anyone has information on where to locate Daily Show transcripts please tell me.

[EN[i]GMA]

I live in Ohio. What's this morons address. Him and Mr. Molotov Cocktail might become aquanted.

[100% ILL]

GMA']I live in Ohio. What's this morons address. Him and Mr. Molotov Cocktail might become aquanted.

Yes yes, Violence and brute force solve everything.

[Ace42]

It doesn't? Then what are we doing in Ir...

[100% ILL]

It doesn't? Then what are we doing in Ir...

How many times does this need to be explained? We are establishing a free and democratic society where once there was a dictatorship.

[Ace42]

Oh yes. Doing that by instituting a puppet dictatorship, and then disallowing a substantial proportion of the population the vote.

Viva la revolution!

[100% ILL]

(sarcasm) Only then will we have a substantial platform from which to launch an invasion on the rest of the Arab nations. In order for us to have the Funds and the fuel that will be necessary to Invade China!

[ms.peachy]

Well honestly though, I mean, WTF were people at the Guardian thinking?

When I first read about this idea, my first thought (after I stopped laughing, which took a while) was "Surely this is the best example of the phrase 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions' ever."

I mean, really. A bunch of Brits writing to people in the middle of America to try and tell them how to vote? Who the fuck thought that would be a good idea?

[ASsman]

People who once held Americans in high esteem.

[Ace42]

I mean, really. A bunch of Brits writing to people in the middle of America to try and tell them how to vote? Who the fuck thought that would be a good idea?

Yeah, god forbid that slack-jawed US retards should actually have their idiotic misconceptions challenged, or influenced by competent individuals. God forbid that they take into mind a stipulation of their own goddamn declaration of independance. God forbid that Americans embark in a frank discourse with the educated citizens of the rest of the world.

Because writing to a stranger explaining your political opinion equates to "telling people how to vote."

Presumably, the person who thought that was a good idea was the same person who mistakenly thought that US citizens were reasonable and open-minded individuals who were part of a progressive first-world democracy. What a fool.

[Bob]

Because writing to a stranger explaining your political opinion equates to "telling people how to vote."



Last week G2 launched Operation Clark County to help readers have a say in the American election by writing to undecided voters in the crucial state of Ohio.

not that big of a stretch IMO

[Ace42]

"having your say" is merely making statements, being heard. Any translation to "telling people what to do" is paranoid to say the least.

[ASsman]

a slack-jawed retard would reply with a punch to your face.
Exactly his point, that only supports his claim.

[Ace42]

Wrong. He wouldn't be punched in the face because we're ignorant or sheeple or slack-jawed. He would be punched in the face because he's a pretentious dick.

Yeah, except if you weren't slack-jawed and ignorant, you wouldn't think that. If a stupid wobbly-arsed yank lardo tried it, they would get a nasty surprise. In the UK we don't subscribe to the misconception that the more intelligent have to also be weedy bespectacled nerds.

What would *actually* happen is that a stupid yank would swing and miss, and I would then deride him, his value system and his mother, while he gets more and more enraged. Then I would run away before he tries to shoot me, safe in the knowledge that stupid lardy Americans can't run, and safer still in the knowledge that I was right.

Face it, your country is made up of a bunch of morons, and when they are out-smarted or out-classed (frequent) they throw a temper tantrum and lash out like spoilt children in need of a spanking. IE the war in Iraq. "Wahhh, some terrorists out-smarted us, and we can't hit them back. Let's go and attack someone who clearly has nothing to do with it! But let's attack some people near some guy we think may have had something to do with it first!"

*I* am the reason the yanks hate the British? Because I (and thus by extension the rest of the UK population) are intellectually superior? Envy is a deadly sin.

Bunch of fools who should choke on their dad's cocks like Dubbyah on a pretzel...

[ASsman]

Wow, if only you had gotten it the first time choda boy.

[EN[i]GMA]

He called British people "filthy animals". I think I have the right to assualt him. And don't get all high and mighty on me. I won't care.

[stillill]

Yeah, except if you weren't slack-jawed and ignorant, you wouldn't think that. If a stupid wobbly-arsed yank lardo tried it, they would get a nasty surprise. In the UK we don't subscribe to the misconception that the more intelligent have to also be weedy bespectacled nerds.

What would *actually* happen is that a stupid yank would swing and miss, and I would then deride him, his value system and his mother, while he gets more and more enraged. Then I would run away before he tries to shoot me, safe in the knowledge that stupid lardy Americans can't run, and safer still in the knowledge that I was right.

Face it, your country is made up of a bunch of morons, and when they are out-smarted or out-classed (frequent) they throw a temper tantrum and lash out like spoilt children in need of a spanking. IE the war in Iraq. "Wahhh, some terrorists out-smarted us, and we can't hit them back. Let's go and attack someone who clearly has nothing to do with it! But let's attack some people near some guy we think may have had something to do with it first!"

*I* am the reason the yanks hate the British? Because I (and thus by extension the rest of the UK population) are intellectually superior? Envy is a deadly sin.

Bunch of fools who should choke on their dad's cocks like Dubbyah on a pretzel...

If you are truely as intelligent as you seem to think you are, you would not be acting like this. It is completely unfair to say that all Americans are uneducated and fat. You can't honestly believe that.

This seems to be the problem whenever there is some type of disagreement: personal attacks. This has nothing to do with the person's views! A stupid person can still have a valid point!

It is also unfair to make generalizations about any group of people based on a few individuals. I am by no means pretending that there are not stupid, uniformed, lazy Americans. But this is true of all people, we just seem to get more press. I have been to England, and I have to tell you stupid people exist there too.

I would agree with you that a lot of Americans do not educate themselves on all of the issues. However, I currently live in Canada and have found that this does hold true here also. I take offense to the stereotype of the fat, uninformed, ass-kicking American.

Most people that I have talked to did not support the Iraq war. I am one of those people. A government's policies do not always reflect the will of the people. Honestly, I can't believe that I need to explain this. The English government is pretty high on the list of governments that I despise. (I am a first generation American; my family is from Ireland.) This does not, however make me hate English people. I have no problem with Brits, and have many English friends. I refuse to believe that you cannot separate the American government from its citizens.

[ms.peachy]

Ace42 if your blatant hypocrisy wasn't so shamefully sad, it would be highly amusing.

The fact is, what the (very well-meaning, to be sure) people from the Guardian campaign did was - in a shockingly unBritish way, really - quite rude. I am sure most of the good people who wrote to the voters saw themselves as offering an informed outside viewpoint, opening a line of debate, whatever.But in fact what they were doing was, as someone has already pointed out, very patronising. Kind of like how the missionaries of old thought they would be 'helping the natives' by bringing them Jesus, in a way.

What they did - and what you are doing - is in no way constructive. It puts people on the defensive, and does not serve any greater good. I think you need to realise that your little tirades are saying an awful lot more about you and the kind of person you are than about your supposed target.

[Ace42]

It is completely unfair to say that all Americans are uneducated and fat. You can't honestly believe that.

Actually, it is statistical fact. As of 2003, Houston was the fattest city of the fattest state of the fattest country in the world. This is not a stereotype or generalisation, this is documented proof based on clinical statistics as dispensed by the the US census office. Does it mean that all Americans are uneducated and fat? No. But did I say *all* Americans are uneducated and fat? No.

This seems to be the problem whenever there is some type of disagreement: personal attacks. This has nothing to do with the person's views! A stupid person can still have a valid point! Yes, they can. And plants grow in the desert. Funny how few deserts are used for gardens though, isn't it?

It is also unfair to make generalizations about any group of people based on a few individuals. I am by no means pretending that there are not stupid, uniformed, lazy Americans. But this is true of all people, we just seem to get more press. I have been to England, and I have to tell you stupid people exist there too.

I don't know any English person who doesn't know that Texas alone could dwarf the UK several times over. I have MET Americans who thought that Wales was as big as North America because they both took up a page in their Atlas. That website, as I said, represented a cross-setion of the country selected at random from the electoral register (actually, the mere fact that they were registered to vote automatically excludes the most ignorant and illiterate plebs, so it is a BETTER than average cross section sadly enough) - they didn't pick the worst just to make Americans look bad. Take a look around your country, there are people like that everywhere, and they are out in force.

I take offense to the stereotype of the fat, uninformed, ass-kicking American. Then why don't you endeavour to educate and exercise some of your countrymen so that the stereotype ceases to hold true? As for the "ass-kicking" read the thread again, and tell me which nationality the poster who first brought up threats of physical violence (both here and on the website) was.

Most people that I have talked to did not support the Iraq war.

And yet all the polls say that that represents slightly less than 50% of the population. From this we can conclude that it is YOUR experience (the majority) and not mine which is in error.

A government's policies do not always reflect the will of the people.

Right, and all the pro-Bush people are just a vocal minority. Yes I know Bush stole the election, but it was too close to just dismiss it and claim majority support. The fact that he is regularly polling at 50% again says as much. These aren't Frenchmen supporting Bush FFS. The US, out of all the nations on the planet, would like to think it is the nation that is least likely to have it government oppress its people and act contrary to their wishes, and yet again, I am being told "oh, our government doesn't act for the majority" - HELLO, 2ND AMENDMENT?!?" Put thy own house in order FFS. This is a pretty fundamental error, so stop ignoring it and admit it. "We fucked up" - now is it because all (thin and educated) Americans are corrupt and hypocritical? Or because there is a large contingent of ignorant fools? You decide which is the most flattering to you personally and apply.

The English government is pretty high on the list of governments that I despise. (I am a first generation American; my family is from Ireland.)

Why, because The English government invaded Ireland half a millenia ago? That invasion was lead by a monarch FFS. That is quite different to having a president of a country which is bound by international and domestic law to refrain from that.

This does not, however make me hate English people. I have no problem with Brits, and have many English friends. I refuse to believe that you cannot separate the American government from its citizens.

Since when was the US a totalitarian dictatorship? It's not communist China, or Stalinist Russia. Sorry, which of your documents says "by the people, for the people" - or like every other American aspiration and principle, was that just a big fat American lie?

[Ace42]

Ace42 if your blatant hypocrisy wasn't so shamefully sad, it would be highly amusing.

It would be "hypocrisy" if an informed and educated foreigner wrote to me explaining why I should vote in another way with a lot of salient arguments and well sourced facts, and then I replied to them saying "Fuck off dago, go eat cheese / rape gooks / invade Poland / shag sheep. Stop trying to subvert our election, I'm going to report you to MI5, and expect a visit from the SAS!"

That is not going to happen. Know why? Because I am not an ignorant yank that considers discourse about politics with an informed individual some sort of affront to my country. When that *does* occur, then there might be "blatant hypocrisy" for you to criticise.

The fact is, what the (very well-meaning, to be sure) people from the Guardian campaign did was - in a shockingly unBritish way, really - quite rude. I am sure most of the good people who wrote to the voters saw themselves as offering an informed outside viewpoint, opening a line of debate, whatever.But in fact what they were doing was, as someone has already pointed out, very patronising.

Patronising? Patronising would be highlighting the consist ignorance of the general American public and exposing your nation for the gang of boobs the majority actually are. What it was was *generous* - giving your nation the benefit of the doubt, and treating them like reasonable adult human beings. And look what the result was.

In the spirit of the Declaration of Independence's pledge to show "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind", we have come up with a unique way for non-Americans to express your views on the policies and candidates in this election

What, expecting Americans to act in a manner as expressed ideologically in the declaration of independance is rude? Perhaps you should rewrite some of your founding principles then. Time to re-examine your national identity and bring it into line. I'd recommend Deliverance as an accurate depiction.

What they did - and what you are doing - is in no way constructive. It puts people on the defensive, and does not serve any greater good.

I agree that the US recipients being stubborn ignorant jackasses might well have been counter-productive. I agree that treating the US citizens like reasonable human-beings was totally the wrong tack to take. I agree that the US citizenry will never "wake up and smell the coffee" and take a good hard look at the ignorant insular intellectual swamp they have manufactured. That is not our failing, that is yours.

I think you need to realise that your little tirades are saying an awful lot more about you and the kind of person you are than about your supposed target.

No, it says more about what you are prepared to acknowledge. "What he is saying is unpleasant, and doesn't conform to my personal or national identity. That's right, despite him having (admittedly circumstantial) evidence which I haven't even attempted to refute or rationalise, HE must be in the wrong and thus the biggot!"

Pshaw.

[Bob]

That website, as I said, represented a cross-setion of the country selected at random from the electoral register (actually, the mere fact that they were registered to vote automatically excludes the most ignorant and illiterate plebs, so it is a BETTER than average cross section sadly enough) - they didn't pick the worst just to make Americans look bad. Take a look around your country, there are people like that everywhere, and they are out in force.


hold on. the fact that they're registered to vote does not automatically exclude anybody at all (at least not based on intellegence or literacy), everyone's allowed to vote. doesn't matter how smart you are.

second of all, if you're talking about my guardian link, then the responses here do not represent a cross-section selected at random. as the link said, 11,000 people requested addresses, so i'm assuming there's at least a roughly equivalent amount of addresses and voters selected. i don't see 11,000 responses on that page, they purposely picked out the ones that stood out the most, which is a terrible way to pick a representative sample.

[Ace42]

hold on. the fact that they're registered to vote does not automatically exclude anybody at all (at least not based on intellegence or literacy), everyone's allowed to vote. doesn't matter how smart you are.

In order to register to vote, you have to be able to sign up, this assumes basic literacy. It also assumes you are informed enough to know you have to register, mobility enough to get there, and interest enough to turn up. It also assumes permanent residence (homeless people cannot collect the mail sent to them by Guardian readers) etc. So yes, all sorts of factors matter.

they purposely picked out the ones that stood out the most, which is a terrible way to pick a representative sample.

It said "here's is some of the reaction" NOT "here are the rudest and most extreme" or did you read the copy of the article which didn't have "Thank God above for you English!" in it? Because the article was terribly misrepresentative, only showing negative responses.

[Ace42]

And yes, I know a selection of a dozen replies is not statistically valid.

[Echewta]

I hope you all need to have your teeth capped.

I knew a guy from Ohio in college who punched someone in the head and knocked them out just because he thought the guy was talking to much. He was talking about a football game. I'm just saying...

[sea_dragon]

It also assumes you are informed enough to know you have to register, mobility enough to get there, and interest enough to turn up.

We had voter registration drives going on all the time and all over the place this year, it doesn't really take any effort at all to register to vote. I was probably approached half a dozen times by people trying to register me. One even came to my door.

[Ace42]

We had voter registration drives going on all the time and all over the place this year, it doesn't really take any effort at all to register to vote. I was probably approached half a dozen times by people trying to register me. One even came to my door.

All you need is for every community in the US to be like Seattle then, and my point would be rendered invalid.

[Bob]

We had voter registration drives going on all the time and all over the place this year, it doesn't really take any effort at all to register to vote. I was probably approached half a dozen times by people trying to register me. One even came to my door.

they did this here, too, two people on two separate occasions came directly to where i lived, going door to door.

[Ace42]

Did they stuff the registration in the trunk of their car and drive off to get their drugs pick-up?

[Bob]

no, i got my registration card the next week

[ms.peachy]

No, it says more about what you are prepared to acknowledge. "What he is saying is unpleasant, and doesn't conform to my personal or national identity. That's right, despite him having (admittedly circumstantial) evidence which I haven't even attempted to refute or rationalise, HE must be in the wrong and thus the biggot!"


Umm... no, you've clearly missed my point, in an effort to score points in a pissing match in which you are the only contestant.

I'm not required to 'refute or rationalise' anything you say. I do not owe you (nor anyone else) any further explanations, and I am confused as to whom you think your vitriolic diatribe is impressing. I have stated my opinion of what the good people at the Guardian attempted to do, and I stand by it. You seem to feel that gives you liscense to be horribly unpleasant, to me and anyone else who holds a different viewpoint from your own, and then you try to claim the moral high ground by accusing others of trying to shout you down (when in fact no one has).

You must be lots of fun at parties.

[sea_dragon]

All you need is for every community in the US to be like Seattle then, and my point would be rendered invalid.

If every community in the US was like Seattle, Kucinich would have actually been a contender. Even with the prevailing attitude of supporting the strongest candidate to go up against Bush, Dennis got a few delegates here.

[Ace42]

Umm... no, you've clearly missed my point

Says the person who has failed to appreciate a single thing I have said all along.

I'm not required to 'refute or rationalise' anything you say. I do not owe you (nor anyone else) any further explanations

Yeah, heaven forbid you should actually substantiate your claims.

and I am confused as to whom you think your vitriolic diatribe is impressing.

I am confused why you should think I post in order to "impress" people. Actually, no I'm not. It's because (as your previous post[s] clearly illustrate) you think you understand me, yourself, your country's position in the world, or even the words I am saying. You have offered not a shred of proof to the effect, and naively seem to think you must be right. If I wanted to "impress" people here, I'd suck all their cocks, celebrate their freedoms and rich peace-brokering history, sophisticated culture, and all manner of other gross misrepresentations.

I have stated my opinion of what the good people at the Guardian attempted to do, and I stand by it.

I am sure you will, no matter how demonstrably perverse your representation of the situation is. Stubborness is not a trait to be proud of. Or are you worried about being called a flip-flopper?

You seem to feel that gives you liscense to be horribly unpleasant, to me and anyone else who holds a different viewpoint from your own

It might seem that way to you, but that is because you are unwilling to accept the posibility (nay, likelihood) that what I am saying is correct. Yes it may be horribly unpleasant, but so is your country. I'm not going to lie and make it seem not as bad as it is. However, if you want me to be horrible about your country, I can do. Believe me, I have been going easy on it for the sake of decorum and working within the realms of the illustrably true. You'd not like to see me go "American voter in the Guardian" on you.

and then you try to claim the moral high ground by accusing others of trying to shout you down (when in fact no one has).

And then YOU make up shit and put it in my mouth so *you* can take the moral highground. I did no such thing pricisely because no-one has. Read the thread again, and the article, and my words, and then reply to what was *actually* said, instead of what you *think* it meant. The two are very very different, I can assure you.

You must be lots of fun at parties.

No, parties here on Earth suck (with or without me), come join us and see.

[ASsman]

Turkey shoot.

Or maybe they don't use that expression in Ohio.

[ms.peachy]

Says the person who has failed to appreciate a single thing I have said all along.

Well, on this we can agree.


Yeah, heaven forbid you should actually substantiate your claims.

I haven't made any claims, other than to state my opinion that what the Guardian tried to do was well intentioned, but misguided.


I am confused why you should think I post in order to "impress" people. Actually, no I'm not. It's because (as your previous post[s] clearly illustrate) you think you understand me, yourself, your country's position in the world, or even the words I am saying. You have offered not a shred of proof to the effect, and naively seem to think you must be right. If I wanted to "impress" people here, I'd suck all their cocks, celebrate their freedoms and rich peace-brokering history, sophisticated culture, and all manner of other gross misrepresentations.

Clearly you write all this because you want people to read it, or you wouldn't bother. I said impress people, not ingratiate yourself. Go buy a friggin dictionary.

Again - what is this 'proof' you are on about? All I've said is that I respect what the Guardian folks were trying to do, but it was presumptous, and not well-thought out. That is my opinion. I am not obliged to now go do a research paper on it to satisfy you or anyone else.

I am sure you will, no matter how demonstrably perverse your representation of the situation is. Stubborness is not a trait to be proud of. Or are you worried about being called a flip-flopper?


wtf are you talking about? 'demonstrably perverse'? blah blah blah fucking blah.

re: stubborness - Hi, Kettle? this is Pot. You're black.


It might seem that way to you, but that is because you are unwilling to accept the posibility (nay, likelihood) that what I am saying is correct. Yes it may be horribly unpleasant, but so is your country. I'm not going to lie and make it seem not as bad as it is. However, if you want me to be horrible about your country, I can do. Believe me, I have been going easy on it for the sake of decorum and working within the realms of the illustrably true. You'd not like to see me go "American voter in the Guardian" on you.

Oooohhh, I'm so scared now, mr. big internet tough guy.

And then YOU make up shit and put it in my mouth so *you* can take the moral highground. I did no such thing pricisely because no-one has. Read the thread again, and the article, and my words, and then reply to what was *actually* said, instead of what you *think* it meant. The two are very very different, I can assure you.

You know, I don't actually expect you to appreciate a single thing I've said here. After all, the hallmark of hypocrisy is the inability to recognise in yourself that which you condemn in others.

I find this whole thing kind of sad, because you're clearly fairly bright, but your belligerance and bellicosity is enormously offputting. It's too bad you have chosen this course, because this could have otherwise been an interesting dialogue. Instead it is just tedious. I haven't the heart for it any further. So, whatever. You've worn me down by sheer will. You win, I guess. You get to be 'right'. Good for you. Help yourself to the last word, I'm full.

No, parties here on Earth suck (with or without me), come join us and see.

No thanks, I'm happy here in London. Maybe another time. Like I said, I'm feeling a little tired.

[Ali]

this one's really good

My dear, beloved Brits,
I understand the Guardian is sponsoring a service where British citizens write to Americans to advise them on how to vote. Thank heavens! I was adrift in a sea of confusion and you are my beacon of hope!

Feel free to respond to this email with your advice. Please keep in mind that I am something of an anglophile, so this is not confrontational. Please remember, too, that I am merely an American. That means I am not very bright. It means I have no culture or sense of history. It also means that I am barely literate, so please don't use big, fancy words.

Set me straight, folks

Exercise in sarcasm if I ever saw one!!!!

Stupid idea from a stupid newspaper. Probably did more good for Bush than anything else, judging from some of the responses.

[Ali]

I think the volume of animosity towards their "greatest allies" and the second biggest contingent in the "coalition of the willing" says it all. "We don't want or need your help" - oh, except for our army, which the US government is desperately trying to second. Yeah, rant on the email about Brits have yukky teeth and other stereotypical myths and beg for them to go to Baghdad and be ordered about by idiots and rely on other idiots for supplies in a war that the majority of the country opposed.

Blair is going to swing for this (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/14149674?source=Evening%20Standard)

Tony Blair looked set to delay the deployment of British troops close to Baghdad as a Labour revolt gathered pace today.

He was facing a hostile reaction from MPs in the Commons. In a show of strength, 45 of his backbenchers signed a Commons motion against the move, including former health secretary Frank Dobson and three other ex-ministers.

With dozens of MPs who previously backed the US-led invasion expressing anger, a rebellion has the potential to become the biggest since Labour took office.

Downing Street was resisting calls for a Commons vote on the decision, with critics claiming Mr Blair would be defeated if MPs were allowed to decide.

DOWN WITH BLAIR! Get rid of him! Robin Cook for PM!

[Jasonik]

American ignorance?! Look who didn't get the memo....from 1776. :rolleyes:

Oh, for the age of the Empire, isn't that right?

[Ali]

What they did - and what you are doing - is in no way constructive. It puts people on the defensive, and does not serve any greater good. Mebee the yanks should write to undecided Brits and tell them who to vote for next year. I'm sure T.Blair and M.Howard will be pleased. My Gawd. The Guardian's done some stupid shit in its time, but this takes the fukn CAKE!

[Ace42]

I haven't made any claims, other than to state my opinion that what the Guardian tried to do was well intentioned, but misguided.

So you didn't say that rather than "offering another opinion" what they were doing was *instructing* people who to vote?

So it was an imposter who said:
A bunch of Brits writing to people in the middle of America to try and tell them how to vote?

You didn't claim:
I think you need to realise that your little tirades are saying an awful lot more about you and the kind of person you are than about your supposed target.

in an effort to score points in a pissing match in which you are the only contestant.

and then you try to claim the moral high ground by accusing others of trying to shout you down

All of which was stated without any attempt at explanation or evidence. The latter wasn't even something subjective, and indeed was patently false.

Do you actually read what you and other people type? You do seem to be inhabiting an alternative reality.

Clearly you write all this because you want people to read it, or you wouldn't bother.

What makes people feel good, and what is good for them, are often two very different things.

I said impress people, not ingratiate yourself. Go buy a friggin dictionary.

im·press1 Audio pronunciation of "impress" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-prs)
tr.v. im·pressed, im·press·ing, im·press·es

To affect strongly, often favorably

in·gra·ti·ate Audio pronunciation of "ingratiate" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-grsh-t)
tr.v. in·gra·ti·at·ed, in·gra·ti·at·ing, in·gra·ti·ates

To bring (oneself, for example) into the favor or good graces of another, especially by deliberate effort

Let's see. "To affect strongly & favorably" / "To bring oneself into favor"

Yeah, completely different...

Clearly, the reason what you say and I say (and the Guardian and presumably everyone else says) differs from what you seem to understand has having been said is because either your dictionary is very very wrong, or you don't know how to use it.

All I've said is that I respect what the Guardian folks were trying to do, but it was presumptous, and not well-thought out. That is my opinion. I am not obliged to now go do a research paper on it to satisfy you or anyone else.

You are if you want people to respect it. Just because something is opinion, doesn't make it some sacred unchallengeable bastion. Opinions not based on fact, or rational / logical argument are not worth the bandwidth they are posted on.

wtf are you talking about? 'demonstrably perverse'? blah blah blah fucking blah.

demonstrably (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=demonstrably) perverse (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=perverse)

Thus, something that is "demonstrably perverse" is something that "can be shown to be persistantly or obstinantly incorrect"

<sigh> And you say *I* need a dictionary and *I* am the hypocrit?


re: stubborness - Hi, Kettle? this is Pot. You're black.

stub·born Audio pronunciation of "stubborn" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (stbrn)
adj. stub·born·er, stub·born·est

1.
1. Unreasonably, often perversely unyielding; bullheaded.
2. Firmly resolved or determined; resolute. See Synonyms at obstinate.

So, you have admitted yourself that you haven't and don't need to back up your opinion with any sort of rationale or factual evidence, and because I have not "yielded", that makes me stubborn? Nuh-uh. Expecting someone to substantiate their claims is not "unreasonable"

Oooohhh, I'm so scared now, mr. big internet tough guy.

It's not about fear, it's about being reduced to 5 inches in height. However, seeing how totally divorced from reality you are, I do not know if you'd even understand what I am saying, much less identify it as being the case. I like to all this "The Sisko effect"

You know, I don't actually expect you to appreciate a single thing I've said here. After all, the hallmark of hypocrisy is the inability to recognise in yourself that which you condemn in others.

What, the "single thing" that according to you is "simply my opinion on the guardian" - or one of the other "single-things" you deny saying? Stubborn I may well be, but so far all you have done is asserted it without any sort of backup whatsoever. And considering your "shouting down" error above, excuse me if I don't use your track record to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I find this whole thing kind of sad, because you're clearly fairly bright, but your belligerance and bellicosity is enormously offputting.

Belligerant? What, after some dumb yanks made threats about "sending in the seals" and throwing punches? All this in the framework of an illegal war which is getting worse all the time, thanks in no small part to the majority of your countrymen? I wonder why!

You win, I guess. You get to be 'right'. Good for you. Help yourself to the last word, I'm full.

Smells like... Victory.

[Bob]

It might seem that way to you, but that is because you are unwilling to accept the posibility (nay, likelihood) that what I am saying is correct. Yes it may be horribly unpleasant, but so is your country.

isn't it your country too :confused:

[Ace42]

Ms peechy is a yank in the UK AFAIK. By "your" I meant country of origin, not "the country you happen to be in."

And also, I wish in the quote you selected I had been bothered enough to proof-read it for typos.

Eitherway done to death:

http://www.beastieboys.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=26479

[DroppinScience]

Ace,

Do you know how NOT to be a dick? :mad:

Maybe when the UK loses your gap-toothed soccer hooligans, tosses out the monarchy, buries their wet dreams of resurrecting the "Empire" (need I bring up the Falkland Islands?), stops worshipping Thatcher, tars and feathers Tony Blair (last I checked he stands a good chance of being re-elected), relinquishes their xenophobia towards Indian/Pakistani immigrants and becomes the light for progress, maybe, just maybe, you could actually pass judgment on how retarded 300 million people are without looking like such a hypocrite.

When the UK starts becoming like Canada (the embodiment of perfection... ok, we're far from perfect either, but we're looking saner by the minute ;)) then you can call everyone with stars and stripes fat, racist and ignorant. Deal?

[ms.peachy]

Smells like... Victory.
Have it. It pongs a bit.

In fact, I'll go you one better. Why not say everything you have to say to me in person?

My husband's out of town in two weeks, and I've been trying to think of a good, non-marriage-threatening adventure. So, wherever you are in England, I'll come to you. I'll even buy you dinner. And then, instead of crouching behind a screen, we can sit down and you can say every little thing you have to say to my face. I think that would be very interesting and exciting. I suspect that you're enough of a prick that you might just do it, but it would be nice to see for sure. How about it?

[Ace42]

Maybe when the UK loses your gap-toothed soccer hooligans, tosses out the monarchy, buries their wet dreams of resurrecting the "Empire" (need I bring up the Falkland Islands?), stops worshipping Thatcher, tars and feathers Tony Blair (last I checked he stands a good chance of being re-elected), relinquishes their xenophobia towards Indian/Pakistani immigrants and becomes the light for progress, maybe, just maybe, you could actually pass judgment on how retarded 300 million people are without looking like such a hypocrite.

Soccer hooligans are a minority, and are equally bad in a number of countries. Turkish hooligans regularly go around knifing each other. They make less publicity because less of them can travel. The monarchy is a thing of the past. While the armies etc are "Royal" the monarchy has no say in how they are used. It is purely traditional. Something that sells crappy tabloids and impresses American tourists. No-one honestly wants to resurrect the empire nor expects to (apart from a minority of crack-pots possibly) and how is *defending the falklands from invasion* even vaguely comparable with *invading another country.* And are *you* forgetting Grenada? "Milk-snatcher Thatcher" is only respected by a minority (generally Tories) who are getting smaller. The fact that Thatcherite Tories like Howard are losing out to even bizarrer cranks like "UKIP" illustrates this. I mentioned the BNP, I believe, in relation to Pakistani /asian immigrants, and again, they are an incredible minority yet again. As far as I know, they don't have a single MP.

Incidently, the UK abolished slavery before the US, just to put "Light towards progress" into perspective.

I did not say the UK was perfect, so don't try and pull that one on me. But in a question of scale, it is not even close to the US in terms of failings.

When the UK starts becoming like Canada (the embodiment of perfection... ok, we're far from perfect either, but we're looking saner by the minute ;)) then you can call everyone with stars and stripes fat, racist and ignorant. Deal?

Firstly, I did not call "everyone" "fat racist and ignorant" - what part of "yes there are exceptions" means "no there aren't any exceptions." A majority != everyone. Don't try to straw-man me. And the US being the fattest nation is not a stereotype, it is statistical fact. Google for "clinically obese" and I am sure apart from gross pictures you will find plenty of evidence.

And, the UK and Canada both have the same Monarch last time I checked, were part of the same common wealth, and have a legal and political system much more akin than the UK to the US.

So yes, deal. Oh, here we go, I've made good on my part, business as usual.

Oh, and people support Blair through pro, not anti-American sentiments, so sugar-coating criticisms of the US is not going to help at all.

[Ace42]

Have it. It pongs a bit.

In fact, I'll go you one better. Why not say everything you have to say to me in person?

My husband's out of town in two weeks, and I've been trying to think of a good, non-marriage-threatening adventure. So, wherever you are in England, I'll come to you. I'll even buy you dinner. And then, instead of crouching behind a screen, we can sit down and you can say every little thing you have to say to my face. I think that would be very interesting and exciting. I suspect that you're enough of a prick that you might just do it, but it would be nice to see for sure. How about it?

I'd love to. If you are genuine in this proposition, it will probably be a lot more productive than making judgements based on inflammatory comments on a message forum. And if having the courage of my convictions makes me a prick - then wipe me off, I'm done.

[ms.peachy]

I'd love to. If you are genuine in this proposition, it will probably be a lot more productive than making judgements based on inflammatory comments on a message forum. And if having the courage of my convictions makes me a prick - then wipe me off, I'm done.

It's not the courage of your convictions that's making me think you're a prick. It's the manner in which you are choosing to present them. Courage, I can admire. Pugnaciousness, I can't.

But yes it is a serious offer. Sat 6 November or Sun 7, take your pick. PM me with details.

[DroppinScience]

So yes, deal. Oh, here we go, I've made good on my part, business as usual.

So you solved all of the UK's problems within typing of that post? Daaaamn, you're good. :p

[Ace42]

Put into perspective. That is more than any Americans have tried to do here. So far, without attempting to illustrate just why my point is invalid (other than by putting words in my mouth and thus criticising something I did not say) the closest that has been posted is Bob saying (quite rightly) that the Guardian's straw poll isn't exactly scientific. That's not even denying the statements about the majority of US citizenry being: Ignorant, racist, over-weight.

Incidently, although (not necessarily the majority, but certainly a significant percentage) I did state that the US being (As of a few years ago) the fattest nation in the world was fact, that was a throw-away response to "that sort o' talking over here would get yer hit, hyuck!"

[DroppinScience]

That's not even denying the statements about the majority of US citizenry being: Ignorant, racist, over-weight.


There may be plenty of validity with the things you say (but I highly contest a "majority" among what you think Americans are about, I see it as a vocal minority subverting the true majority), but face it, you're biased to take it out on Americans. No matter how much good there exists with America, you won't hear any of it.

Oh yeah, and just because you've got a point, it doesn't mean you shouldn't be greeted with a punch to the face. :D

[Ace42]

There may be plenty of validity with the things you say (but I highly contest a "majority" among what you think Americans are about, I see it as a vocal minority subverting the true majority), but face it, you're biased to take it out on Americans. No matter how much good there exists with America, you won't hear any of it.

You assume I am prejudiced against Americans? The UK until recently (As I believe was pointed out in this thread) was a pro-American country (and still is in a lot of respects, despite the recent debacle) as was France.

If you want to find a reason for this, the answer does not lie in the UK or France.

[DroppinScience]

You assume I am prejudiced against Americans? The UK until recently (As I believe was pointed out in this thread) was a pro-American country (and still is in a lot of respects, despite the recent debacle) as was France.

If you want to find a reason for this, the answer does not lie in the UK or France.

I'm talking about YOU. What the UK government is doing or the attitudes of the rest of the British people is beside the point completely.

A hell of a lot of nations (Canada included) has had a history of being pro-American AND anti-American (sometimes simultaneously), your point being?

[Ace42]

I'm talking about YOU. What the UK government is doing or the attitudes of the rest of the British people is beside the point completely.

My point was that prejudice usually comes from the society around you, not because one day you decide "Oh, I'm just going to descriminate against a group of people arbitrarily" - it is generally only middle Eastern individuals who have a problem with Kurds, and mainly Romanians (although, being 'travellers' and widespread, this is not as isolated) who have a problem with Gypsies.

Thus, anti-American sentiments are not just a random outburst of bile, to dismissed as a misconception. It is not like me and the vast number of people in these countries suddenly woke up one day and decided that we'd all pick on the US for a change for no reason.

It is not like I have an inbuilt distaste for all Americans, and the US posters on here that are reasonable only managed to earn my esteem by chipping away at erroneous convictions about them as individuals.

[jusme1072]

it is no wonder there is a majority in this country who think it is perfectly ok to go and bomb, invade, and take over other countries. we apparently don't give a rats ass what the rest of the world thinks. we don't care what people in england tell us about how the rest of the world feels, we don't care how the families of the children who are shot down in cross fire feel, we don't care when other nations rights are stomped over because we have an "agenda". and well, lives get lost when we are trying to impose out idea of what every other country should be run like. i'm not saying getting rid of sadam was a bad thing, i'm just saying that this is why we run into such unmovable opposition in the un, because we don't give a crap what anybody else thinks anyway.

now this is just my opinion, not facts, i'm just saying if we are going to wander around the world imposing "order" maybe we should take at look at some of the countries and people that need help. like people in south africa, or north korea. i undestand people in iraq were suffering, i'm just saying there are a lot of other countries were people are suffering and would have gotten support from the rest of the world if people in office or people in clark county gave a crap about the world community.

[Ace42]

I do think it backfired.


I think it is very hard to extrapolate the effects of the scheme, considering the allegations of ballot-fraud all over the state.

it seemed spectacularly patronising to suggest that the people of Clark County would be so volatile that they would vote one way simply because an individual several thousand miles away had suggested they do the opposite.

It is amusing that if it did "backfire" it is seemingly because numerous Ohio voters act like spoilt children. Also that the US electorate can so easily be "played" simply by making an argument for the candidate you want to fail. No doubt Osama learnt a valuable lesson from "Operation Clark County" and it was one the American voters were all to kean to be suckered in by.

What other lessons can we draw from Operation Clark County? I guess we will have to wait till November 3 to find out for sure, but here's a provisional stab: there are a huge number of people around the world who are profoundly dismayed by the prospect of another four years of a Bush White House and who are desperate for a way to do something about it; Guardian readers are a reassuringly engaged, resourceful and largely charming bunch; parts of America have become so isolationist that even the idea of individuals receiving letters from foreigners is enough to give politicians the collywobbles and, perhaps, in the digital age little acorns can turn into big trees very, very quickly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1332041,00.html

[Ace42]

Well, you seem to think so. You think a lot of Kerry voters decided to ignore the issues, and vote Bush just to piss off some foreigners?

Quite possibly.

But it is not a case of "not understanding you" - it is more of an unwillingness to accept that any supposedly first-world nation could be so incredibly backwards.

This can be seen as:

Giving Ohioans "the benefit of the doubt"
Being optimisitic
Trusting American media
Believing the US "hype" (including the vast majority of definiting statutes and laws the US professes to hold dear, and disregards at every opportunity)

Or any one of a number of compounding errors in judgement that generally boils down to not appreciating just how monumentally perverse, corrupt, deplorable and twisted middle-America is.

Well, buh, they elected that fool Bush again, so don't expect the world to make that mistake again.

[drobertson420]

My favorite reply....

Please be advised that I have forwarded this to the CIA and FBI.
United States.


Those Meddlin' Brits!!! (lol)