>>>>>what amazes me is that you constantly see those who buy into it (whether accurate or not) as a majority of the people here.
>>>>
>>>>Where did I say that?
>>>
>>>It might be me, but do North Americans have a disfunctional BS meter?
>>>
>>>You didn't write "he" or "the author" or anything specific. The comment was "North Americans" meaning all.
>>
>>It might be cultural, but by saying that I do not really mean all nor the majority of the north americans. Its phrased as a question to provoke an answer. My observation is more directed at the people up hrere who appearantly are intelligent professionals, but seem to be unable to recognize BS when its in front of their face, as long its saying what they want to hear.
>>
>>Don't get me wrong. Something simular is hapening up here with "Geert wilders" (just google on him), an extremist politician up here and its followers, except that I don't think that his followers can be intelligent at all. Both categories however would qualify the term "Voting cattle" which are blindly following the partyline, and no matter how many valid arguments you fire, they won't listen. Its like trying to learn a ping to sing. You get frustrated and you annoy the pig. You still do to prevent others to be turned into pigs however.
>
>And yet you generalized again in this message calling the citizens voting cattle and you did not isolate to any one group:
>
>Message #1454466

Hmmm, tracy. I could expact a comment from you with what you wrote. Yes, I do generalise because talking about individual cases gets you nowhere. The word generalisation has a too negative load because its often used as an argument for discrimination, but it helps draw a global picture of the topic you're describing.

I could generalise the dutch as being cheese heads, stuborn and arrogant. That would certainly fit in the great scheme. Does it have a negative load? Depends who you are talking to and what was said. Voting cattle exist in every country... so also up here.