's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

Sidelight to Steam's post re "vivid language": Is that bad?(19 posts)

Sidelight to Steam's post re "vivid language": Is that bad?Cory
Jan 13, 2004 10:01 AM
I'd be first to admit I don't have a finger firmly on the pulse of Middle America, assuming it has one. But O'Neill's semi-apology for his "vivid" language, recent publicity about Dean's "anger" and some similar news raises a question: Does America really CARE about that?
I've listened to politicians for decades, and I'm gee just so doggone tired of speeches that don't say anything. Personally, I'd welcome vivid language--call a moron a moron, a crook a crook and a huge international f****p a huge international f****p. I'll vote for a politician who'll stand up and admit he's angry over one who forcefully suggests that the situation may require careful additional study before we bring it to the committee to determine if consideration of action is warranted.
Inside the Beltway definition of 'gaffe':OldEdScott
Jan 13, 2004 10:06 AM
Telling the truth.

Dean keeps getting in trouble for telling the truth. That doesn't piss me off. It only pisses me off when he tries to back off it. Frontrunner-itis.
agree absolutely.rufus
Jan 13, 2004 10:10 AM
would respect o'neill even more if he'd say, "yeah, i called him that, and you know what else?"
It's uncivilizedTJeanloz
Jan 13, 2004 10:11 AM
I would prefer the political tenor to be civil in nature, and rise above petty namecalling. Why is calling something a "f****p" better than calling it a "mistake" or an "error in judgement". Using abrasive language is vulgar, and I'd like to think that my politicians have good enough manners to not be vulgar. It is completely unnecessary and serves only to inflame a particular group - it makes the debate more about flame than about policy, and I don't think that's desirable.
I would prefer that governance be civil in nature.czardonic
Jan 13, 2004 10:36 AM
But until it is, it may be necessary to fight fire with fire. Sometimes it is simply impractical to find a polite way of describing the current administration's machinations.

Republicans have done very well for themselves equating Democrats with Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. But of course, they are deeply concerned that Democrat negativity will turn off voters, and solemnly advise them to lighten up on their Bush hatred.
It isn't negativity,TJeanloz
Jan 13, 2004 10:38 AM
I don't have anything against negativity, it's the resort to foul language that I find unnecessary and unappealing. My grandmother can quite easily express her displeasure with the Administration without resorting to 4 letter words, and I have serious concerns about anybody who can't.
I see. So slanderous accusations don't bother you. . .czardonic
Jan 13, 2004 10:46 AM
. . .its the potty mouth that is ruining politics.
Not if they're true,TJeanloz
Jan 13, 2004 10:52 AM
Though, I suppose by definition, slander is not true. So, yes, I take issue with factually incorrect statements.

Actually my biggest political pet-peeve are attack ads that make factually true, but incredibly misleading statements. When I have more money than I know what to do with, I'm going to fund a non-partisan ad campaign that runs spots that explain exactly how a candidate is twisting facts to make their opponent look bad.
I'm with you on that one. (nm)czardonic
Jan 13, 2004 10:54 AM
re: Sidelight to Steam's post re "vivid language": Is that bad?landru
Jan 13, 2004 10:27 AM
Aren't you a journalist? Or am I mixing you up with someone else? Aren't you supposed to have a finger on the pulse of Middle America ;)?

Anyway, it would be a refreshing change for a politician to speak like a normal sometimes tactless human being. The thing that probably bugs me the most is when these guys don't want to offend the religious folks and fall all over themselves professing their "belief in Dog", when it's just pandering.

It would be nice to hear someone say: "look, you people are a bunch of lazy fatasses. Get off you couch and stop whining about the price of gas. WALK to the store for dogsake!" (for example)
we should learn from the BritishDougSloan
Jan 13, 2004 10:31 AM
The British can insult the heck out of someone and do it in such a pleasing and scholarly manner that it sounds gentlemenly and respectable.

Americans are stuck with extremes, it seems, either diluted-say-nothing-double-talk or in-your-face teenage sniping. We aren't very good at the in between or the combination.

Americans generally say they like straight talkers, but they rarely elect them.

Would the right honorable gentleman care to elaborate...dr hoo
Jan 13, 2004 10:45 AM
... on his position on this wrongheaded, regressionary, and paleolithic policy that is leading us towards the brink of disaster at the cost of our children's welfare, education and safety?

While you are doing that, I shall commence with my harrumphing.


I LOVE parliament! That's what wrong with American politics: not enough harrumphing.
Anti-intellectualism runs too deep in America.czardonic
Jan 13, 2004 10:53 AM
Just look at the current mush-mouth in chief's "regular guy" appeal.
Would the right honorable gentleman care to elaborate...Jon Billheimer
Jan 13, 2004 11:16 AM
You forgot to mention the desk pounding, too! Personally I'd love to see Bush have to stand up in Congress everyday during question period to fend of the barbs and criticisms of a real opposition!! The ensuing political theatre of the absurd would give new meaning to the term "moron". Pity the fact that there is no real political "opposition" in the American government.
thanks - nmMJ
Jan 13, 2004 10:57 AM
With the current success of "Newlyweds" and "The Simple Life"...Tri_Rich
Jan 13, 2004 12:25 PM
"President's Question Time" would be a huge rating success.
A neo-progressive, perhaps, awaiting the return of Teddy R?sn69
Jan 13, 2004 10:47 AM
...Hmm, could be. BUT, I tend to agree. While I think that modern cultural language has devolved into a lazy reliance on cursing (I should know...I am a sailor, after all), I wouldn't mind some political banter more akin to that which goes on in the House of Commons rather than the same or boring sh!t that the Republican and Democrat drones mumble witlessly over and over and over....

Just imagine John McCain standing at the podium calling-out Tom Dascle for a "meeting" by the flagpole after school, or Dean calling Kerry a "bleeding panty waste f*&^-stain." Oh what fun it would be.

(My money would be on McCain, incidentally.)
re: yeah rattle the shlt outta the cage..jrm
Jan 13, 2004 1:57 PM
we need regime change at home NOW. The problem is that middle america is a coupla fries short of a happy meal when it comes to issues. They just eat up the spin though.
Can you post what was said?Spoiler
Jan 13, 2004 2:03 PM
Or post a link? I missed it, so I can't horn in on whether the language was offensive.
Here, here. Pish-posh.