Blogcritics Comments on 2008: An American Resolution

Comment by Silver Surfer on 2008: An American Resolution

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:18:53 EST

Lol doc ... the Great Australian Salute. Having just recently returned from Western Australia, I can tell you the bush flies are a lot worse over there. I spent the whole time doing the salute, and then when I was walking along St Georges Terrace on my way back to the hotel (this is a main avenue in the city centre of Perth, BTW), one of the buggers flew straight into my mouth. Even in the heart of the city, where you think they'd drop off a bit, they were the most persistent flies I've ever encountered. And they're pretty damn persistent on the east coast, as you know, so that's saying something.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:34:23 EST

My personal favorite, which is rather vulgar: "Dropping the kids off at the pool."

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:07:33 EST

A couple more, which originated with the computer generation: Snail Mail Nerd

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:04:52 EST

With respect, I disagree, B-tone. Here are some uniquely American expressions and words which I think are both imaginative and not obscene: Sugar daddy Yuppie Rug rat Gumshoe Space cadet Ballpark figure Mosey Uncle Sam Joe Six Pack Just a few; there are, I'm sure, many many more...

Comment by Baritone on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 21:45:24 EST

Between the Aussies and the Brits, you all have so many colorful metaphors it's difficult to keep up, don't you know? Most American metaphors are less interesting and unimaginative in that they usually pertain to some bodily function or are otherwise an obscenity. Americans generally don't enjoy their language as the Brits and you Aussies do. B-tone

Comment by Dr Dreadful on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:17:13 EST

Australia, of course, has its own unique salute. When I was Down Under I had ample opportunity to practice the Bush Salute, which involves waving one's hand, palm down, back and forth across one's face every few seconds. The salute may be given all over the country, but is de rigeur in the Outback and, for some reason, that little park just under the north end of Sydney Harbour Bridge.

Comment by Silver Surfer on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:57:03 EST

B-tone: "It's not like the Aussies get a very prominent place on the world stage. Of course, I think that's a good thing". Lol. I'm with ya there b-tone. Imagine that: packs of lunatic Aussies roaming around the world and causing strife all over the shop and barely being understood. Oh, wait ... :) Nongs isn't a word that should taken seriously, however. It's a bit of a playful way of describing a pack of, well, nongs ... I wasn't applying it just to you guys either. Doc was on the list too just for joining in. I hope my description of this word has further enlightened Dr Dread, who has wondered about its meaning for some time, and perhaps also you B-tone. I have heard the saluting thing before too, BTW. It was once the subject of a quite lively pub discussion.

Comment by baritone on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:50:43 EST

Upon rereading my note regarding salutes, what the good ole sergeant told us was that it was palms down if a country hadn't lost a "war," not simply a battle. It's still stupid, but at least I am quoting him more closely. The way I see things is that we Yanks are not so good and smart and on top of the heap as most flag wavers believe, but nor do I believe that we are any more "nongs" than the rest of the world. We all share in human frailty. We all say and do really stupid things. It's just that the U.S., being the 500 pound gorilla gets poked and prodded and scrutinized more than the rest. It's not like the Aussies get a very prominent place on the world stage. Of course, I think that's a good thing. B-tone

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:43:56 EST

B-tone. I called you all a pack of nongs. This is Australian for "less than idiots". This should be your indicator to the seriousness of my post. I knew where you were coming from ...

Comment by baritone on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:39:29 EST

STM Regarding your #21. I didn't say that I believe the tale about salutes. I probably did back in high school because I didn't have any other frame of reference. It's not something that since that time I have dwelled upon. But giving such a claim any thought would bring to surface the improbabliity of such nonsense. As I indicated, it was simply a small tidbit of the generally erroneous crap that the American military feeds its neophytes. I'm sure similar hogwash can be found to have been force fed to young Brits, Franks, Ruskies and whoever. Such bullshit is just part and parcel of the generic "military mind." |

Comment by Dave Nalle on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:34:02 EST

So, those of us who eat breakfast tacos are just the gardeners and nannies? My breakfast tacos always have bacon and egg in them. Sometimes we throw in some chorizo or potatoes or cheese for those that like such things too. That's the Texican way. Dave

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:06:25 EST

"What, is it like an omlette inside a taco" A short lesson in Mexican culture: The taco is the whole thing; the wrapper is a tortilla (pron: tore tea ya). Tacos can contain almost anything under the sun, and often do. They also can be part (or all, sometimes) of any meal. And yes, "an omelet inside a tortilla" is a fair dinkum description of a breakfast taco.

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:32:25 EST

I must add, the Spanish and Portuguese do eat ham, eggs and cheese for brekkie, so you'd assume that's been passed along elsewhere. Putting chillies in 'em sounds pretty good. What, is it like an omlette inside a taco??

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:19:43 EST

Sorry, drifted off there for a bit... "What's in 'em? Ham and eggs?" Yeah, mate, as Doc says, "pretty much." Some cooks (especially in Mexico and South Texas) will put a few chiles and a little cheese, some tomatoes in 'em, too. �Sabroso!

Comment by Dr Dreadful on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:12:53 EST

Clav @ 26, 27: Maybe 'Canuck' is a non-PC term. Well, Dave didn't know that 'Paki' was offensive. Let's just say that's both of our first strikes...

Comment by Dr Dreadful on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:40:21 EST

What's in 'em? Ham and eggs? Pretty much, yeah. Yum, yum...

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:33:37 EST

Make that "it's all good ...

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:32:30 EST

Besides which, Clav, wouldn't my theory still apply. Since bacon/eggs or ham/eggs is a breakfast favourite in the US, wouldn't that put it in my "family" category? Basically, in the US I can walk out of a hotel, go straight to the nearest diner (well, maybe not in Miami), and order bacon and eggs for breakfast without it being considered some kind of bizarre special request. It's all goo provided I don't ask for tom-AH-to.

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:24:22 EST

No, they are people who have been corrputed by living in Mexico and Miami. Tacos for breakfast. Heavens! Perish the thought. What's in 'em? Ham and eggs?

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:14:02 EST

So, those of us who eat breakfast tacos are just the gardeners and nannies?

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:11:48 EST

I have a test. It's called the bacon-and-egg test. People from countries who eat bacon and eggs for breakfast aren't foreigners. They are family.

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:03:08 EST

Doc, Re my #26. I'll answer myself: "Apparently, not any more. From Wikipedia:" "The Random House Dictionary notes that: "The term Canuck is first recorded about 1835 as an Americanism, originally referring specifically to a French Canadian. This was probably the original meaning, though in Canada and other countries, "Canuck" refers to any Canadian." Carry on...

Comment by Clavos on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:54:49 EST

Doc, Doesn't "Canuck" refer specifically to the French (you should pardon the expression) Canadians?? A Canuck (in that sense) friend of mine is the source of that little gem. He also says it's mildly derogatory.

Comment by STM on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:42:45 EST

A book I read recently had a piece about a well-known London club in the 1920s and '30s. On the club's books, there were four nationality categories: British, Colonial, American and "foreign". (foreign meaning anyone not of the first three categories, which should give us all pause for thought as Paul is now likely to use this to make a case for his theory that the British are actually still running the US govt). I think that's a fairly standard view - except that I'm not a colonial any more, you bastards!

Comment by Dr Dreadful on 2008: An American Resolution

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:34:30 EST

Americans are still not really regarded as "foreigners" by the British, as I'm sure Doc will attest. And neither are any of the English-speaking peoples, at least not in my book. Yanks, Canucks, Aussies, Kiwis, West Indians... we're all family. Well, except maybe for those bliddy Seth Efricans!