| Author |
Message |
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:17 am
Post subject: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
From _The Guardian_:
"The Democrat source claimed that Mr Bush called Kerry a worthy, tough
and honourable opponent."
and
"The brief conversation between the two men, which was confirmed by
Democrat campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, concluded one of the
most expensive and bitterly contested presidential campaigns in
history."
--
Steny '08!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John Seeliger
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:01 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Areff" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2usp6kF2er2u7U1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | From _The Guardian_:
"The Democrat source claimed that Mr Bush called Kerry a worthy, tough
and honourable opponent."
and
"The brief conversation between the two men, which was confirmed by
Democrat campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, concluded one of the
most expensive and bitterly contested presidential campaigns in
history."
|
Not to mention our lifetime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Areff" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2usp6kF2er2u7U1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | From _The Guardian_:
"The Democrat source claimed that Mr Bush called Kerry a worthy, tough
and honourable opponent."
and
"The brief conversation between the two men, which was confirmed by
Democrat campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, concluded one of the
most expensive and bitterly contested presidential campaigns in
history."
|
Shameful.
For those who have not followed previous discussions of the matter in this
newsgroup: The use of "Democrat" as the adjective when speaking of a member
of the Democratic Party (as in "Democrat source" and "Democrat campaign") is
a deliberate insult on the part of some members of the Republican Party: The
name of the party is the "Democratic Party." Compare to the highly offensive
use of "Jew" in expressions such as "Jew shopkeeper," contrasted with the
standard "Jewish shopkeeper."
There are, of course, at least two other possibilities to explain the
examples in *The Guardian*: That the reporter who wrote the above was
ignorant of the controversy concerning the usage and/or that the reporter
wrote "Democrat source" and "Democrat campaign" because it seemed more
natural to him in British English.
If he did intend to use "Democrat" in an insulting manner, that would be not
merely "pro-GOP," but would indicate support for a particularly disgraceful
subset of the Republican Party.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise wrote:
| Quote: | "Areff" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2usp6kF2er2u7U1@uni-berlin.de...
From _The Guardian_:
"The Democrat source claimed that Mr Bush called Kerry a worthy,
tough and honourable opponent."
and
"The brief conversation between the two men, which was confirmed
by
Democrat campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, concluded one of
the most expensive and bitterly contested presidential campaigns
in
history."
Shameful.
For those who have not followed previous discussions of the matter
in
this newsgroup: The use of "Democrat" as the adjective when
speaking
of a member of the Democratic Party (as in "Democrat source" and
"Democrat campaign") is a deliberate insult on the part of some
members of the Republican Party: The name of the party is the
"Democratic Party." Compare to the highly offensive use of "Jew" in
expressions such as "Jew shopkeeper," contrasted with the standard
"Jewish shopkeeper."
There are, of course, at least two other possibilities to explain
the
examples in *The Guardian*: That the reporter who wrote the above
was
ignorant of the controversy concerning the usage and/or that the
reporter wrote "Democrat source" and "Democrat campaign" because it
seemed more natural to him in British English.
If he did intend to use "Democrat" in an insulting manner, that
would
be not merely "pro-GOP," but would indicate support for a
particularly disgraceful subset of the Republican Party.
|
Well, I'm sure you know the _Guardian_ is a paper of liberal
leanings, and that this last possibility can be discounted. The
writers, though, are generally pretty young and, like most British
people, short on historical detail; so I think you should excuse
them. I take an interest in these things, and I can never remember
which of the two I have to use to avoid giving offence.
I fancy the problem arises because small-d "democratic" just sounds
like an adjective to us; whereas in European terms we're used to
parties being called "The [Something] Democrats".
Note, though, that the paper's style guide unequivocally says:
QUOTE/
Democratic party
(US) not "Democrat party"
/ENDQUOTE
Perhaps the guide should add that the alternative may be taken as
offensive, rather than just wrong.
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 9:21 pm
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Raymond S. Wise" <mplsrayNOSPAM@gbronline.com> wrote in message news:<W6idnfi9kLnUgBfcRVn-3g@gbronline.com>...
| Quote: | "Areff" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2usp6kF2er2u7U1@uni-berlin.de...
From _The Guardian_:
"The Democrat source claimed that Mr Bush called Kerry a worthy, tough
and honourable opponent."
|
[ ... ]
| Quote: |
There are, of course, at least two other possibilities to explain the
examples in *The Guardian*: That the reporter who wrote the above was
ignorant of the controversy concerning the usage and/or that the reporter
wrote "Democrat source" and "Democrat campaign" because it seemed more
natural to him in British English.
If he did intend to use "Democrat" in an insulting manner, that would be not
merely "pro-GOP," but would indicate support for a particularly disgraceful
subset of the Republican Party.
|
Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
Part of the problem is that many BrE speakers, especially ones who've
never lived in the US, find the difference between the two main
parties pretty obscure. After all, most Democrats are republican, and,
at least in the past, most Republics were democrats, and when G. W.
Bush talks about the merits of bringing democracy to Iraq etc. it's
unlikely he means establishing the aims and policies of the Democratic
Party. So, insulting or not, there is a real need to distinguish
between democratic ideals and the ideals of the Democratic Party.
Although use of names for political parties that don't bear much
relation to the characteristics of the parties is by no means limited
to the US (the Liberal Party in Australia is a clear example), there
is, in the UK at least, a tendency to suppose that some relationship
does exist. Even today in these glorious days of
Thatcherism-with-a-human-face under the label New Labour, the Labour
Party is less conservative than the Conservative Party, and has
closer links with manual labour than the Conservative Party has.
There was a time (maybe it's still true) when, all the main German
parties, from extreme left to extreme right, had "Democratic" in their
official names, so it became just a meaningless fill-in word. In
France the parties on the left have informative names, but those on
the right have meaningless names. The governing party is the UMP --
Union for a Popular Movement, whatever that means, and its major
component used to be called the RPR -- Gathering for the Republic.
Before the UMP was created there was a proposal to change the name
from RPR to just R (Rassemblement, or Gathering), but it didn't pass.
I interpreted this to mean that they thought they were a Gathering for
Nothing in particular (which would also be RPR) but thought it would
be less blatant to drop the second R; of course, the official
explanation was something different.
athel
--
Athel Cornish-Bowden
athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr
http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/homepage.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:05 pm
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
On 5 Nov 2004 06:21:46 -0800, athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr (Athel
Cornish-Bowden) wrote:
| Quote: | Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
|
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone. I would
think "stupidity or ignorance" of this is an over-reaction. I'd just
put it down to an unthinking error in the no-big-deal category. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:22 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:05:05 GMT, Tony Cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | On 5 Nov 2004 06:21:46 -0800, athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr (Athel
Cornish-Bowden) wrote:
Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone. I would
think "stupidity or ignorance" of this is an over-reaction. I'd just
put it down to an unthinking error in the no-big-deal category.
|
I'd attribute it to ignorance of proper English usage and idiom, but that's
probably offensive too.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark in Stumptown
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 5:18 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:418bd0e5.51279728@news.saix.net...
| Quote: | On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:05:05 GMT, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net
wrote:
On 5 Nov 2004 06:21:46 -0800, athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr (Athel
Cornish-Bowden) wrote:
Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone. I would
think "stupidity or ignorance" of this is an over-reaction. I'd just
put it down to an unthinking error in the no-big-deal category.
I'd attribute it to ignorance of proper English usage and idiom, but
that's
probably offensive too.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk
|
My experience of the usage is that it is a US southern regionalism. I
rarely hear it from anyone not originating from the former confederate
states. Since these states have been strongly Republican for a generation,
these speakers are not likely to be admirers of the elder party. The usage
is heard from persons whom one would expect to be conversant with rules of
english usage, so it has struck me as intentional, rather than rooted in
ignorance. One also hears the derisive term 'republicrat', possibly
influenced by this usage. Just my opinion, of course, which is anecdotal,
but based on my experience in the southern US.
Mark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 5:40 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
Tony Cooper wrote:
| Quote: | I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone.
|
I had no idea there was a Republican tradition of referring to the Dems as
the "Democrat Party" till learning about it in AUE. I still do not agree
with Ray Wise and Arjay that it is related to "Jew shopkeeper" or the
like. One thing I did find out, in researching this, is that the custom
seems to originate in one of the Eisenhower vs. Stevenson campaigns.
My guess is that the Republicans are simply trying to remove from the
Democrats the advantages that come from having a nize ideal thing like
"Democratic" in their name. I think it's a matter of nose-tweaking, not
bigotry. Democrats have been guilty of far worse (as have Republicans).
--
Steny '08! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:13 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
Mark in Stumptown wrote:
| Quote: | My experience of the usage is that it is a US southern regionalism. I
rarely hear it from anyone not originating from the former confederate
states. Since these states have been strongly Republican for a generation,
these speakers are not likely to be admirers of the elder party.
|
But the usage of "Democrat Party" by Republicans got started in the 1950s,
when there essentially were no Republicans in the South.
--
Steny '08! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jordan Abel
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:09 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
Mark in Stumptown wrote:
| Quote: | One also hears the derisive term 'republicrat', possibly
influenced by this usage.
|
"Republicrat" comes from disgust with the two-identical-parties system, not
preferentially directed at either party [between which, to those who use
the term, there is little meaningful difference]... there's no reason to
assume it's influenced by the mis-adjectivization of "Democrat", since it's
used as a noun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 5:36 pm
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
Tony Cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<7u8no0t3rnvq6c8ugo71av4ce8t8i4k18v@4ax.com>...
| Quote: | On 5 Nov 2004 06:21:46 -0800, athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr (Athel
Cornish-Bowden) wrote:
Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone. I would
think "stupidity or ignorance" of this is an over-reaction...
|
OK, "ignorance" was too strong a word; I just meant "lack of
knowledge" in a completely non-pejorative sense. After all, as I said
in the previous sentence, I was ignorant of this usage myself until a
year or two ago.
athel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Seeliger
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:06 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Mark in Stumptown" <mark@stumptown.net> wrote in message
news:2v2ck1F2fu2lbU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: |
"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:418bd0e5.51279728@news.saix.net...
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:05:05 GMT, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net
wrote:
On 5 Nov 2004 06:21:46 -0800, athel@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr (Athel
Cornish-Bowden) wrote:
Given the general political tendency of the Guardian it seems clear
that the explanation owes more to ignorance than to a desire to be
insulting. I think I only learned myself in the last year or two that
"Democrat Party" was intended to be insulting, and I'm sure there must
be many outside the US (and probably quite a few within) who haven't
yet learned it. As a general rule it's usually best not to attribute
to malevolence things that can more easily be explained by stupidity
or ignorance.
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone. I would
think "stupidity or ignorance" of this is an over-reaction. I'd just
put it down to an unthinking error in the no-big-deal category.
I'd attribute it to ignorance of proper English usage and idiom, but
that's
probably offensive too.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
uk
My experience of the usage is that it is a US southern regionalism. I
rarely hear it from anyone not originating from the former confederate
states. Since these states have been strongly Republican for a
generation,
|
I'm not sure this is true. Texas, Georgia and Arkansas have produced the
only Democratic Presidents since that last successful candidate from
Massachusetts, though the one from Texas is largely responsible for the
southern shift away from the Democratic Party in the south. Certainly
Johnson and Carter are a generation ago, but Clinton was only 12 and 8 years
ago. He won Florida, Arkansas (naturally. It is the Natural State.),
Louisiana and Tennessee (of course) in 96 (Two of these states with a
majority, even though there was a fairly strong 3rd party candidate.). Swap
Georgia for Florida and ydou have the 92 results. Also, they have held
statehouses and senatorial seats in several southern states during the
preceding decade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Seeliger
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:08 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
"Areff" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2v2drhF2gs82cU6@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | Tony Cooper wrote:
I would normally use "Democratic Party", but I had no idea that
"Democrat Party" could be construed as insulting to anyone.
I had no idea there was a Republican tradition of referring to the Dems as
the "Democrat Party" till learning about it in AUE. I still do not agree
with Ray Wise and Arjay that it is related to "Jew shopkeeper" or the
like. One thing I did find out, in researching this, is that the custom
seems to originate in one of the Eisenhower vs. Stevenson campaigns.
My guess is that the Republicans are simply trying to remove from the
Democrats the advantages that come from having a nize ideal thing like
"Democratic" in their name. I think it's a matter of nose-tweaking, not
bigotry. Democrats have been guilty of far worse (as have Republicans).
|
If I have ever done that, that would be the reason. Not to be insulting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jordan Abel
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 6:07 am
Post subject: Re: Grauniad Outed as Pro-GOP |
|
|
John Seeliger wrote:
| Quote: | My experience of the usage is that it is a US southern regionalism. I
rarely hear it from anyone not originating from the former confederate
states. Since these states have been strongly Republican for a
generation,
I'm not sure this is true. Texas, Georgia and Arkansas have produced the
only Democratic Presidents since that last successful candidate from
Massachusetts,
|
This proves his point - a Democratic candidate cannot carry the southern
states [and is thus very unlikely to be elected] unless from the south,
whereas they'll vote for a Republican candidate from anywhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in