Jump to content

The US of A - definitions

louisiana

By louisiana
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

louisiana

louisiana

Posted
Posted

As America outdoes itself, insulting the intelligence of the rest of the world (including the Scots!), let us turn the tables.


What you call things matters greatly. The French may well be cheese-eating surrender monkeys, and whether you agree with it or not, the term has probably influenced the way you see the French.


Let us therefore turn our sights on the US of A. We know that the South is known as Jesusland. But we lack at present the language to succinctly describe this nation in such crystal-clear terms as we have for the French and Germans.


Let your imaginations run riot, why don't you.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/7714-the-us-of-a-definitions/
Share on other sites
bigbadwolf

bigbadwolf

Posted
Posted

I'm generally pro-American and am a great supporter of the 'special relationship'. I also think that Barack Obama is going to prove himself as a great force for change in the future. I was particularly impressed by his decision to introduce legislation capping the pay of many of Wall Streets players. That took a lot of guts to essentially say to an incredibly powerful institution that "you got us into this mess, now you're going to pay for your mistakes".


I personally don't think that any administration will successfully disarm it's citizens as there is a genuine feeling that they need the right to bare arms entrenched in their mind set. This is most probably encouraged by the countries pioneer, wild west history and Americans are a very proud and patriotic people who wont give in to the connection they have with their past and forefathers.


My issue with the current gun laws and politics isn't the fact they're constitutionally entitled to a firearms certificate but it's the type of hardware they have access to. In several states (mainly New England) people are allowed to purchase and hold several automatic weapons. To get hold of the particular rubber stamp on your license all you have to do is pay a $300 tax to the ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) for each weapon you wish to purchase. In the state of California it's perfectly legal to own a grenade launcher and many do. My point is that this sort of kit should only be reserved for the Military and Police, not for citizens. Basically, you don't need an anti tank weapon to hunt dear or protect your home.


My one word to sum up the Yanks.


Transparent.

louisiana

louisiana

Posted
  • Author
Posted

bigbadwolf Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm generally pro-American and am a great

> supporter of the 'special relationship'.



BBW, if you believe that the special relationship exists, other than as a one way street for the US of A to get what it wants, you are more stupid than I thought. B)



I also

> think that Barack Obama is going to prove himself

> as a great force for change in the future. I was

> particularly impressed by his decision to

> introduce legislation capping the pay of many of

> Wall Streets players. That took a lot of guts to

> essentially say to an incredibly powerful

> institution that "you got us into this mess, now

> you're going to pay for your mistakes".

>

> I personally don't think that any administration

> will successfully disarm it's citizens as there is

> a genuine feeling that they need the right to bare


bear


> arms entrenched in their mind set. This is most

> probably encouraged by the countries pioneer, wild

> west history and Americans are a very proud and

> patriotic people who wont give in to the

> connection they have with their past and

> forefathers.

>

> My issue with the current gun laws and politics

> isn't the fact they're constitutionally entitled

> to a firearms certificate but it's the type of

> hardware they have access to. In several states

> (mainly New England) people are allowed to

> purchase and hold several automatic weapons.


Yes, their murder licenses are very attractive.


To

> get hold of the particular rubber stamp on your

> license all you have to do is pay a $300 tax to

> the ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) for each

> weapon you wish to purchase. In the state of

> California it's perfectly legal to own a grenade

> launcher and many do. My point is that this sort

> of kit should only be reserved for the Military

> and Police, not for citizens. Basically, you don't

> need an anti tank weapon to hunt dear


deer


or protect

> your home.

>

> My one word to sum up the Yanks.

>

> Transparent.


That's good BBF.


Those people do what they say on the tin.


EXCEPT, when it comes to public funding. Because while the good ol' US of A protests so much the virtues of private everything, their private firms receive huge public funding, and have huge lobbies to ensure it stays that way.


They shout 'anti public' and then claim huge public subsidies. Under Bush this was rampant.


For me, the big enemy in the US of A is corporate lobbyists with multi-million pound budgets, who buy senators and congresspeople.


Someone tell me I'm wrong.

bigbadwolf

bigbadwolf

Posted
Posted

It is actually bare Lou.


Pinhead.


However...


I appreciate that it could be seen as a one way street and I'm mainly highlighting the general feeling of mutual respect given to Brits since we share such a common history and to an extent, culture.


I agree that the 'special relationship' is, a mainly one way street concerning U.S interests, but it can be beneficial when we're leaning away from Europe. A luxury that most E.U members don't enjoy.


Apart from America, Russia has got to be without a doubt, the most pikey nation on earth. It's far to big for it's own good and is run by some of the shadiest characters imaginable. The place is a mess!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Rockets
      Crikey! This Doesn't Look Good For The Housing Secretary

      By Rockets · Posted

      But at the same time those she sought for advice told her, very clearly, she needed to seek specialist advice which she did not do and carried on regardless. So I think the jury is out on whether this was a legitimate mistake or not.
    • malumbu
      Crikey! This Doesn't Look Good For The Housing Secretary

      By malumbu · Posted

      Thanks @Sephiroth I was thinking along the same lines (demonisation of Rayner by the media) and came across this article yesterday from Manchester Evening News.  It doesn't excuse her, but the title "Angela Rayner's real offence was being a working class woman in power" is self explanatory. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/angela-rayners-real-offence-being-32422596 The crossing legs nonsense is particularly telling.
    • Sephiroth
      Crikey! This Doesn't Look Good For The Housing Secretary

      By Sephiroth · Posted

      Given her role, she pretty much had to go. I don't think she is an avid tax-schemer who deliberately set out to avoid tax - I do pretty much believe her story of multiple high-profile roles and looking after a child with needs. But many regular voters juggle demanding jobs and families and are afforded no leeway by taxman, so she totally should have known better But here we are - she was found to be negligent and now she has suffered teh consequence. To me that its the OPPOSITE of all parties/politicians as generally the ignore the whole thing (today we have Tice saying Farage's tax affairs are of no interest to voters for example) And it would be poor form to not acknowledge why she was targeted quite so viciously - we even have posters on here here saying "when I saw her taping on a boat that was the  end for me" - like the end of what?. Her gender and class were clear motivators for many people. Two wrongs don't make a right - but it';s interesting to see some posters on here give so many others a blank cheque. Many are planning to vote for Farage despite his dishonesty being 100x worse than Rayner PS - I don't think she will join Corbyn party - unlike him she is smart and unlike him she recognises that being In power means you can at least stand a chance of delivering results This. The Greens will have a rise in the polls on back of new leader but that is one hell of a coalition of NIMBY/YIMBYs As what would Reform do if in government to help with... well, anything?   Labour can at least point to decreasing waiting lists, lower immigration numbers, not having a different PM every 6 months - not that anyone is listening
    • malumbu
      Crikey! This Doesn't Look Good For The Housing Secretary

      By malumbu · Posted

      So what do people want?  More housing.  More affordable housing.  But not in my back yard. That applies to urban areas too.  Easy to criticise, but where are your answers?

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...