Ken,
I am not sure that it is a good idea. Many Americans would take it as an even larger offense. If Washington lived now, I do not think that he would like to be that associated with Bush and what is going on in the city that have his name. Maybe we could start to call both America, US and Washington for Bushington instead, in the context of what is going on. How does it sound with "Bushington is obsessed" or "Bushington wants war" etc etc. Hakan At 07:50 AM 2/25/2003 -0800, you wrote: >Keith writes: > > > > >This is exactly why the US, the UK and the other Allies > >formed the UN after WW2. It is a problem for the whole > >world, not just Washington, and when the whole world > >disagrees with Washington's proposed "solution", > >Washington should listen, rather than trying to railroad > >the UN and the world. > >This gives me an idea -- I've been wondering how to refer to >"my country" in conversations these days. The problem is >that "America is obsessed", "America wants war," etc etc. >doesn't speak for ME or many of the Americans I know. > >I think I'll start referring to the insane masterminds of >this immoral foreign policy, as well as the ones who just >sit idly while it happens, as "Washington". That doesn't >cover all of 'em, but it covers a good percentage. Somewhere >along the way, "Washington" got the idea that it was synony- >mous with "America". It's not, and we need a simple way to >clarify that in discussions. > >Thanks for the tip, Keith :-) -K Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
