HS30-H Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 I see quite a lot of 'politics' on this site recently ( and no, I'm not talking about 'Hybrids' vs 'Purists'), so I wondered what some of you guys think about this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1329858,00.html I have to say that myself and some of my friends and colleagues over here in "Limey Land" have been quite amused at almost all of the responses. Actually, I think I have received PMs on this forum from some of the respondents who typed in caps lock! So, was The Guardian overstepping the mark? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 That is one of the funniest things I have read in regards to this whole election. I am still laughing. Amazing the wide range of responses. But really, we have enough dissenting opinions of our own. Don’t need another nation of outsiders stirring up the pot. I grew up in the midwest. I think you should heed the warnings about this backfiring on you. I would be interested to see what some of the UK to US emails said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 This whole campaign finance "reform" is going to blow up in a whole bunch of offshore campaigning next time. I can hear it now: "GW passed legislation that encourages the OUTSOURCING of our campaigning!!!" And you know Akmed will be calling right at dinner time. Those are really stupid laws. I think the only candidate who had that one right back in 2000 was... Alan Keyes... scary thought. With regards to the UK thing I don't think any country would particularly appreciate that. It's obvious that there is a pretty serious gap in the politics of Europe and America. It's too bad you guys can't get your heads on straight... Well at least you are in the UK and not France. As far as the content of the ad I think it's just like any other opinion. The source is VERY important. From the little blip I saw on the news it didn't look particularly virulent or mean spirited but I haven't read it personally, so I guess I only know what they told me. The thing that bugs me MORE than the fact that this ad comes from a foreign country is the fact that it comes from a "news" paper. Here in Commie Town...uhh... Seattle, we have political telemarketing from the newspapers. Got one yesterday. "The Seattle Post Intelligencer would like to remind you that we support Prop 69-The Free Smack for Transsexual Addicts who Need a Fix Initiative and we encourage everyone to vote YES on 69 on Nov 2." Absolutely sickening. The only upside to that is they aren't trying to HIDE the bias, but that is small consolation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 I have to say that myself and some of my friends and colleagues over here in "Limey Land" have been quite amused at almost all of the responses. The responses are pretty funny and the UK got a taste of the vast range of wacky folks here in the US. It appears that the majority are from people who were never contacted, just folks who heard about the story. I guess that most folks who received an e-mail probably deleted it as SPAM. So, was The Guardian overstepping the mark? From an "unsolicited e-mail" point of view, absolutely. From a media/entertainment point of view, no. But, what's really pissed off us here in the US is the comment by Charlie Booker in the Guardian advocating the assasination of our President. Regardless of your political leanings, that kind of "humor" doesn't go over very well on this side of the Atlantic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2126 Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 If I remember correctly......threatening to assasinate the President is a federal offense!!!! The Feds are always looking for these type of people...if you know what I mean! I've got a grand idea.........let's send John Kerry to England and make him Prime Minister!!! All interesting responces, but I especially love the ones that remind Jolly Old England of past history. Most beeding heart liberal Europeans have forgotten what the USA has done for them. Maybe having German as thier national language and doing the goose step is their idea of a good time. Oh, how sad it is we all forget the past!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HS30-H Posted October 26, 2004 Author Share Posted October 26, 2004 It appears that the majority are from people who were never contacted' date=' just folks who heard about the story. I guess that most folks who received an e-mail probably deleted it as SPAM. But, what's really pissed off us here in the US is the comment by Charlie Booker in the Guardian advocating the assasination of our President. Regardless of your political leanings, that kind of "humor" doesn't go over very well on this side of the Atlantic.[/quote'] As far as I understand, the contactees were not e-mailed at random. They gave their e-mail addresses willingly and agreed to the principle of being contacted with regard to the election. So they were not technically victims of unsolicited SPAM. I think you are right in guessing that most of the comments received by the Guardian, and shown on the page I linked, were from people who had simply heard about the story rather than people who had themselves been contacted. I don't know anything about the comment from Charlie Booker, but I'm willing to bet that it has been taken out of context. It was more likely to have been satirical than anything else.... I would reserve comment on something like that until I had read the article or heard the quote myself. We do have laws over here that would be enforced should somebody make a serious effort to incite such an act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HS30-H Posted October 26, 2004 Author Share Posted October 26, 2004 If I remember correctly......threatening to assasinate the President is a federal offense!!!! The Feds are always looking for these type of people...if you know what I mean! If he made the comment or wrote the article here in the UK, does it still qualify as a "Federal offense"? I think you might find that anyone coming from the USA to arrest this journalist would have to comply with English law. All interesting responces, but I especially love the ones that remind Jolly Old England of past history. Most beeding heart liberal Europeans have forgotten what the USA has done for them. Maybe having German as thier national language and doing the goose step is their idea of a good time. Oh, how sad it is we all forget the past!!! Personally, I find your response just as 'interesting'. In my experience I don't think that British people ( not just the citizens of "Jolly Old England" ) have such a bad grasp of "past history". Its actually all around us. I wonder how you figure that these "bleeding heart Liberal Europeans" have forgotten "what the USA has done for them"? We have memorials ALL OVER Europe to the men who made the ultimate sacrifice during the two World Wars. I think very few people over here are likely to "forget". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HS30-H Posted October 26, 2004 Author Share Posted October 26, 2004 I think you should heed the warnings about this backfiring on you. I know what you mean by that, but I'd still like to make the point that this was a project dreamed up by a national newspaper here in the United Kingdom. They are not 'representing' the British public, nor - I believe - do they imply such a thing. When you write "you" I expect that you must mean The Guardian newspaper, and not the British public, the British Government, or anybody else. Certainly not *me*. Many of the respondents quoted in the web page I linked to seem to have overlooked this point. As though a British newspaper ( and one with a marginal view at that ) is representative of the British public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 When you write "you" I expect that you must mean The Guardian newspaper, and not the British public, the British Government, or anybody else. Certainly not *me*. A common grammatical nuance in American English. What is the phrase? Two great people separated by a common language. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 Regarding Charlie Booker's quote, it seems the Guardian deleted the original article and put this correction in its place: http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguide/tvradio/story/0,14676,1335307,00.html I did find the last part of the original article here but it might be taken out of context and part of a larger, satirical piece: On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanomon Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 HS30-H, to answer your question...YES! and...WAY! Considering the sourse, I wouldn't put much emotional stock in it. Cheers from SoCal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.