American Reaction to Advice

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Okay, I can't recall who had the poll on here with a choice of voting for Bush or for a block of cheese, the point of the poll being to post the results on an American forum to help open their eyes. The Guardian in England appears to have had a simiar idea (Operation Clark County), they have been sending letters from prominent Brits to Ohio voters to discourage them from voting for Bush.

Well, here is the American reaction. Someone else on this forum has pointed out that Americans aren't all rednecks. This is true, but an astonishing number of people who responded to the Guardian idea appear to fit the category rather well:

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

And John Gibson of FoxNews says, "The Guardian's point in all of this was to show the world that the American voter is not qualified to select the leader of the free world. And the letters they got from us will confirm that opinion among many around the world.

Well, here's a news flash to all those people wherever they are: We don't care."

What, they don't care that they are idiots? Or they don't care that they are unqualified to select the leader of the free world?

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: American Reaction to

Isn't it striking how crude the responses from the die-hard Bush supporters are? Almost violent.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to

Isn't it striking how crude the responses from the die-hard Bush supporters are? Almost violent.

Quite unsettling, there's an almost mob-mentality rage in the choice of words, the venom. The bitterness and hate is unbelievable, I was stunned by it, it was almost like a physical blow to read them.

It made me think of what you said, Rev, about this very kind of attitude intimidating moderates and left-leaners in the US into keeping quiet. Scary, really.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Well people eventually people are entitled to their opinions ... calling them idiots isn't a proper response either Haggis.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to Advice

Well people eventually people are entitled to their opinions ... calling them idiots isn't a proper response either Haggis.

Not a proper response, but from the gut. Perhaps you are right, though, and I should rephrase:

'No idiots these, but rather people with minds that function when watered... and sadly, are struggling to survive in a drought-hit environment'. Better?

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

My point is that you are complaining about the rudeness - which with I agree with too - , but meanwhile, call them idiots too. You know what I mean?

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to Advice

My point is that you are complaining about the rudeness - which with I agree with too - , but meanwhile, call them idiots too. You know what I mean?

Well, yes Rick, I know what you mean.

I feel confident, however, that my reference to 'idiots' pales by comparison to the general tone of emails sent to the English. Aside from which, I am not directing my message to Americans, I am saying it in a Canadian forum.

That said, by all means accept my apologies if the term 'idiot' somehow offended you.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Oh, and PS to the above, I was not complaining about rudeness, I was discussing the almost out-of-control hatred inherent in the emails sent to the Brits by the Yanks.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Now the word "idiot" did not offend me personally. What I do want to point is that these people act from a different point of view. Not that I approve of any of their rude remarks. However, you call them idiots because you believe they are idiots, because they do not share the same ideologies. Vice versa. Concerning ideologies, I'm on your side (I guess :wink: ). But well, it sounds weird, but many of them "just don't know better" (just as a lot of people from "the older side", probably even including me, "just don't know better" either; wow those sociology lessons are really kicking off ...)

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to Advice

However, you call them idiots because you believe they are idiots, because they do not share the same ideologies.

Again, though, I am not directing my words to them personally, I am not saying these things to their faces, Rick. I am saying them in a Canadian forum among friends - mostly like-minded friends, I might add. I'm not searching out American forums to post my words, I'm not riding south to spit them out the window at the Americans passing by.

If I tell my husband in the privacy of my home that President Bush is an idiot, is that rude? Personally, I don't think so. Well, I tend to treat this forum more or less as though it is an extension of my living room, a place where I can be outspoken about such things.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: American Reaction to

Is it rude to react to rudeness in kind? These people are decidedly indelicate...apparently taking their cue from Dick Cheney and George Bush. They show no sign of thoughfulness and are not presenting an argument to back up their views. What they are doing, in fact, is spewing obscenities in an attempt to silence others.

In my book calling them idiots is fine. It's probably better than they deserve, in fact.

 

[bevvyd]

Haggis, you gotta keep in mind that all of this is coming from people who elect actors and members of the WWF into parliament, and who re-elected a president whose only claim to fame was getting a blow job and managing to keep his marriage. And we won't even go on about how to fill out a chad properly.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to

What they are doing, in fact, is spewing obscenities in an attempt to silence others.

And that it seems to be working to silence others is, in itself, a glimpse at the bigger picture of what is wrong in the United States today.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

Re: RE: American Reaction to Advice

Haggis, you gotta keep in mind that all of this is coming from people who elect actors and members of the WWF into parliament, and who re-elected a president whose only claim to fame was getting a blow job and managing to keep his marriage. And we won't even go on about how to fill out a chad properly.

Yes, whenever I start thinking (dreaming?) that people will surely wake up and ultimately not vote for Bush, I remember that they voted twice for Reagan and, more recently, voted, as you say, for Ahnold in California. It bursts my dream pretty quickly.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

If I tell my husband in the privacy of my home that President Bush is an idiot, is that rude? Personally, I don't think so. Well, I tend to treat this forum more or less as though it is an extension of my living room, a place where I can be outspoken about such things.

Hmmm good point ...OK my initial point was that it seemed to me first you were calling them idiots because they voted Bush, not as much as calling them idiots because of their rude remarks ... my second post was a bit weird, cause I contradicted myself (sort of) ... so now I wanted to ask the question: are they idiots because they vote Bush (even if they present their personal arguments), or because they made the rude remarks? ... However, this seems to have been answerred already by Reverend Blair ... so that's it I guess.

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

are they idiots because they vote Bush (even if they present their personal arguments), or because they made the rude remarks?

I'd say both, because the blind patriotic fever that ignites these Bush voters also fires up their hate for those who disagree. Maybe that, in part, is the difference. People on the left view the right as idiots in this election, but the people on the right are more inclined to view the left with a profound hatred that goes much deeper, somehow. This is only a theory.

Either way, what the Brits did was wrong for the same reason I thought Chewy's offering of Canadian opinion to the US was wrong. It doesn't help the cause in the slightest, only hurts it. On the other hand, the venom shown in the reaction to the Brits was the worst of the two evils, in my view.

 

[Numure]

We didnt react as bad as that when Moore and Nader interviened in our election. Me, of the left might I add, said "Mind your own business". That was pretty much the reaction of most Lefties here, and on other forums.

Though when I've viewed the responce from does voters... I was appauled. Its out of place for the guardian to have done such a thing. But they've proven their point. And I'm guessing that was exactly the result they we're looking for. To show their viewers the "American Right".

 

[zenfisher]

And John Gibson of FoxNews says, "The Guardian's point in all of this was to show the world that the American voter is not qualified to select the leader of the free world. And the letters they got from us will confirm that opinion among many around the world.

Well, here's a news flash to all those people wherever they are: We don't care."

What, they don't care that they are idiots? Or they don't care that they are unqualified to select the leader of the free world?

I really don't think the Guardian proved there point. As it could be conceived that the American people may not be qualified to elect their leader. But the British Prime Minister has sure been supportive of the current President. What does this say about the British ? Are they qualified to elect a leader or a follower? Wouldn't a county in Florida been a better choice? :twisted:

I agree with Numure, no other country should be interfering with another countries election.

Actions like this often have the reverse effect. It may indeed push the jingoist buttons in this county and state. It could swing the whole state towards Bush. How do you react when you perceive someone's in your business and telling you what to do?

 

[Haggis McBagpipe]

I agree with Numure, no other country should be interfering with another countries election.

Which is exactly what I said, yes, and what I have been saying for awhile now. It is the worst possible thing to have done, and I can't imagine what the Guardian was thinking when it did it and what the readers were thinking when they went along with it. It was totally wrong.

That said, it was amazing to read the level of hatred in the responses. Some responses were excellent, and made the point well but others were shockingly brutal, far out of proportion to the 'crime' in question.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

Are leftish people more rational? Now I consider myself to be a bit rational, and I'm leftish haha but what do you think? Is it an advantage that people on the left tend to be less carried along when it comes to patriotic feelings, or church rhetoric (as Haggis said, at least, for the "patriotic feelings", but than with as example the Bush-voters)? (Personally, I sympathize with this view). Or are people on the left maybe just the same as others, and are they maybe "irrational" in being rational, by immediately rejecting a large part of "rightish", "conservative" or "religious" rhetorics? Are leftish people more rational?