The Brits are doing better than us?
January 7th, 2008 at 02:09pm Pat Cunningham
Here’s something for the Democrats to exploit:
The Daily Mail, a British paper, REPORTS  that the Nigels have attained a higher standard of living than their American cousins.
Oh, the shame of it all.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized


5 Comments Add your own
1. Tom Bri | January 7th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
A momentary blip in exchange rates causes international excitement. Remember in the ’80s when the Japanese were in the catbird seat? One small area of downtown Tokyo was said to be worth more than all of California. Then the crash came…
European elites tend to take any opportunity to make the US look bad. That is why they loved Bill Clinton so much. He made the whole US political scene look like Arkansas.
2. Pat Cunningham | January 7th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Tom: It wasn’t just the Europeans who loved Bill Clinton. So did most Americans. On the day Clinton was impeached, his approval rating hit 73 percent, which was higher than Ronald Reagan ever reached.
3. Charlie Boysenberry | January 7th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
It is also interesting to talk to Europeans about their “quality of life” - they seem much more satisfied and happy than many Americans. Part of the reason methinks is that they don’t measure “quality” strictly in terms of standard of living. They include time off work for “holidays” and child rearing, health care, treatment of youth and the elderly, among other factors. More and more it looks like the 21st century will be the European century as the United States consumes, consumes, consumes, and goes further into debt.
4. Sanak | January 8th, 2008 at 1:40 am
Wow, you must have a REALLY old slang dictionary. The only meanings I can find for “Nigel” are:
Nigel (Wikipedia)
(AUS) Used during Vietnam War as derogatory slang for any Vietnamese.
And:
nigel (Urban Dictionary)
Referring to an black man.
I know you didn’t mean either of those as they would be hugely in appropriate for a newspaper blog, but you might want to check the terms you use before you publish, just to be sure.
Regarding Clinton, of course he was well liked, he governed by polls in order to ensure that result. It didn’t solve any problems, but kicking the can down the road worked for him.
Grolier’s The American Presidency:
“(G)ood presidents make the most of what they do face and move public opinion in their direction, and Clinton failed to do that. The fund-raising speech took precedence over the bully pulpit. Rather than chart a bold new course or seek the winds of change, Clinton followed the currents of popular opinion. Rather than set the terms and tone of public debate, he governed by polls. And so historians may judge the Clinton presidency, as do many Americans today, as a mixture of promise and disappointment.”
http://ap.grolier.com/article?assetid=0065280-0
5. Pat Cunningham | January 8th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Sanak: My use of the term “Nigels” was intended as a reference to Brits, not to blacks or Vietnamese. When I first came across it in that sort of context many years ago, I figured it arose from the fact that the name Nigel, while fairly popular in Britain, has never really caught on over here in the colonies. If I had known that it has potential racist connotations, I never would have used it.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed