Page 2 of 3
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:04 pm
by MrChaos
Duckwarrior wrote:QUOTE (Duckwarrior @ Sep 22 2011, 08:33 AM) I formed my opinion of Americans through WBC, WWE, WKN & WCCO Minnesota.
My conclusion: They like W's.
I always shop at Walmart & Walgreens because I presume them to be their most upmarket stores.
Duckie = womb of a WAC ?
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:24 pm
by Raveen
Duckwarrior wrote:QUOTE (Duckwarrior @ Sep 22 2011, 03:33 PM) I formed my opinion of Americans through WBC, WWE, WKN & WCCO Minnesota.
My conclusion: They like W's.
I always shop at Walmart & Walgreens because I presume them to be their most upmarket stores.
President George W Bush = Proof.
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:30 pm
by Dome
Woe are we
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:45 pm
by Broodwich
whatever wankers
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 1:12 am
by Archangelus
Double W! brood wins.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:29 am
by Heyoka
Well, we will watch what happens with this whole "w" thing...personally...I think it's hogwash.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:48 am
by Duckwarrior
Wow, well weirdly, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin & Wyoming wouldn't work without W's.
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 2:01 pm
by Heyoka
Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 8:17 pm
by germloucks
At the end of the day, im glad the courts have upheld their rights to be douchebags. Free speech includes stuff you dont like, so deal with it.
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:48 am
by Duckwarrior
Good point germ, and where the US has a fundamental advantage over the UK. If it had gone to court here, the press would have seen an opportunity to boost sales and ratings by being outraged. Then then the population would have been outraged, and then weak, wishy-washy politicians would have been outraged, and then free speech would have received a kick in the sack.
Our politicos think it is perfectly fine to meddle in decisions that should be left to the judiciary. They implement crazy, knee jerk legislation, that has huge and far reaching long term consequences for very short term problems, with little or no consultation.
An example, the reaction of our coalition government to the recent riots. They proposed the implementation of legislation to block social networking sites and mobile phone signals during periods of civil unrest, because gangs were using them to organise. Seriously, I'm not joking. They honestly couldn't see the parallel between them using laws like these and governments they call repressive in places like China and Iraq using them.
This has dipped below the radar, but it hasn't gone away. It is on the back burner, it will be slipped on to the statute books at some stage. Ten years ago, under a Labour government, we had blockades of fuel terminals in outrage at the implementation of a duty escalator. The reaction of the government? Put a law in place that makes it a criminal act to do the same again.
So yes, putting up with cranks like the WBC is the price you pay for freedom of speech. Americans understand this, we don't seem to get it on the most basic level. The downside is hugely outweighed by the up side.