By on December 2, 2011

We at TTAC get our fair share of complaints once in a  while. (They usually start with a “b” and end in “ias.”)

We are nothing compared to Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear.  The likewise UK site Carbuzz chronicled the biggest complaints against Clarkson.  According to The Guardian, “Clarkson, who flew out to China to film a new series of Top Gear as the row erupted on Thursday, issued an apology.”

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

108 Comments on “Jeremy Clarkson Is A Pig-Ugly Homophobic...”


  • avatar
    jmo

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNy1w4DV5Hw

    I assume everyone has seen the former PM’s response to the petition to make Clarkson Prime Minister?

  • avatar
    Chicago Dude

    The guy certainly knows how to stir up the kind of controversy that brings in the money. Like a lot of this type of person he will bring in tons of cash for his employer until he crosses one too many lines, they fire him, and he goes on to make tons of money on a show that he owns and produces himself.

    Such is life. Sometimes the truly talented are destructive to society.

  • avatar
    noxioux

    Keep it up, Jeremy. Political correctness must die.

  • avatar
    tbhride

    Jeremy Clarkson is the UK’s Howard Stern? Methinks it likely.

  • avatar
    V572625694

    Since discovering the Brit “Top Gear” here a while back (the Peel50 “review”) I’ve been overdosing on it via Netflix. It’s fun, but none of the three “presenters” knows much about cars. Then again, if they did it might not be so entertaining.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      Well, actually one of them does know quite a lot about cars, but is constantly ridiculed by the other two, for being a geek as soon as he opens his mouth :). Hint, they also call him captain slow, but he was the one who was sent to Germany to test the ‘even faster’ Veyron :).
      On the other hand, it is a ‘show’, not an informational program about cars. And it’s usually more fun to watch one bad episode of the British show ,than to watch the combined joke reel of all the American ‘Top gear’ episodes put together…
      Seriously, how can they change the ‘celebrity in a reasonably priced car’ to ‘big star in a small car’? It’s like the actually put a lot of effort into making it dry and slow…

    • 0 avatar
      MrGreenMan

      I never know if the shows are supposed to be an in-joke, although it would fit with a national humor built on cross-dressing, but Fifth Gear appears to be the slightly more straight-laced alternative, Clarkson sometimes mentions them in other media outside the show, and Fifth Gear gets perennially canceled and brought back because it’s just not as funny.

  • avatar
    M.S. Smith

    What? Offensive comedy? Well I never!

    I don’t really agree with a lot of what Clarkson says but he is entertaining, and that’s what he is paid to do.

    • 0 avatar
      cfclark

      I don’t see what the problem is, but then I thought George Carlin was a genius.

      It’s a show, for entertainment, not Parliament.

    • 0 avatar
      Loser

      M.S. Smith and cfclark,
      I’m with you both. Seems like people are always looking for ways to be offended. The great thing about a TV, you can change the channel if you don’t like what’s on.
      + 1 on George Carlin.

      • 0 avatar

        @Loser: Agreed.
        There are certain people who are JC’s opposite number. -They specialize in Offending Themselves.

        They use that narcissistic version of [feigned/entitlement-minded] social outrage to oppress others; just in the reverse direction. The mentality is exactly the same as the cartoon they rail against.

        I’ve actually had someone jump up and start haranguing me in a coffee shop over a discussion I was having with a friend at our table.*

        It was to say the least, shocking. -And which word was in his first sentence? -”Offended”

        =>Hence my utter adoration for JC grows with each day. Every time I think I couldn’t love him more for poking at some PC jerk, he goes and brings The Awesome.

        .
        *Don’t worry. I took care of it. His denatured, unidentifiable ‘remains’ are now a part of no fewer than 18 different states and 6 countries. I’m sure the flowers he helps give life to will be quite lovely.

  • avatar
    Xeranar

    Clarkson ıs really every thing wrong wıth Brıtaın ın a sense of tolerance and decency. The guy screams nationalist arrogance and a desire to go back to a white supremacy and colonial era. I understand 99% of what he says is tongue-in-cheek but the reality is he feels a certain amount of it is true, it’s like playing stereotypes, a speck of truth in a sea of exaggeration.

    Also, lets be honest with ourselves here, the British built HORRIBLE cars in term of reliability. It had nothing to do with their unionized workforce and everything to do with their ancient designs and poor resourcing. They tended to make better sports cars than most because they had a passion for it but their average passenger car was 20+ years behind the equivalent American or even Japanese model. So his railings against organized labor is somewhat disturbing and totally misplaced. He’s a twit with an axe to grind that has a panache for being witty.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      No, he simply knows his audience.

      I personally don’t think, eg, Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh really have the convictions that they espouse, either, or at least have them with any strength, but they, and the advertisers that pay their salaries, know that their audience does.

      He’s a douchebag for hire. More power to him, and he probably laughs all the way to the bank.

      • 0 avatar
        Zykotec

        Honestly I believe Jeremy Clarkson is more the real deal, in that he thinks he’s funny himself. He is also quite comfortable with being made fun of himself, and makes fun of himself more than most. He genuinely likes to provoke others because he’s hard to provoke. Nothing douche-like about him at all in my opinion. And he is a master of weird descriptions.

      • 0 avatar

        Shorter version: Psar is smarter than all those right wing rubes.

      • 0 avatar
        Vance Torino

        Clarkson’s right-wing Thatcherite douche-baggery and global warming denial is pretty obnoxious, I agree.

        Just look up the “Chipping Norton Set”

        At least James May is there for the left wing!

        That May is also super smart!
        Long live Captain Slow!

      • 0 avatar
        TurboDeezl

        He doesn’t buy into Global Warming? He should be silenced immediately!

    • 0 avatar
      CJinSD

      No. It was the unions that killed the British car industry.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        And, amazingly enough, unionized workers who made Japanese, German and even Swedish car industries made great cars. Why is that? Because Japanese, German and Swedish car companies made well-designed, well-engineered cars that were built with high-quality components and materials. Quality in, quality out.

        Meanwhile, the unionized workers making British, American, French and Italian cars made crappy cars. Why is that? Because American, French and Italian cars were poorly designed, poorly engineered, and made with poor quality components and materials. Crap in, crap out.

        Fast forward to 2011, and sure enough, the unionized workers are being given well-designed, well-engineered cars to build, and high-quality materials to build them with…and voila! They’re making good cars! Who’d have thunk it?

        But I’m sure it comforts you ideologically to blame unions.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        Meanwhile, the unionized workers making British, American, French and Italian cars made crappy cars. Why is that? Because American, French and Italian cars were poorly designed, poorly engineered, and made with poor quality components and materials. Crap in, crap out.

        It’s funny how Rover succeeded in taking a perfectly good and highly reliable Honda (the Acura Legend), and by adding some Lucas electronics and its own parts, managed to transform it into one of the most unreliable cars sold in the US in its day (the Sterling.) Yet today, Honda can build perfectly good cars in the UK using union labor (although to be fair, the union there claims that Honda would like to get rid of it.)

      • 0 avatar
        acuraandy

        +1. Ever seen the TG about British Leyland? The one that Clarkson correctly stated that they could’ve built better cars if they weren’t always striking?

        And he was right, they were communists.

    • 0 avatar

      While some things on British cars in the 1960s and 1970s (and I owned a Lotus and an MG branded Austin, plus my Dad had an Austin America) could have been engineered better, Brit cars were indeed plagued by an indifferent labor force that would strike at the drop of a hat. You don’t think that wildcat strikes affect quality? Labor contracts also hindered modernization of the plants, though obviously management ultimately has control of the physical plant.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        I wouldn’t hold the unions blameless, but German, Swedish and Japanese automakers are also HIGHLY unionized, and nobody accuses them of making crappy cars, do they?

      • 0 avatar
        PenguinBoy

        @FreedMike “I wouldn’t hold the unions blameless, but German, Swedish and Japanese automakers are also HIGHLY unionized, and nobody accuses them of making crappy cars, do they?”

        Point taken, but it’s easy to come up with plenty of examples of cr@ppy German, Swedish and Japanese cars, just as it’s easy to come up with examples of excellent cars from other countries. Broad generalizations like this don’t amount to much, you have to consider the individual year, make and model and how it compares to other cars available at the same time.

        The last time we saw any mass market British cars in North America was in the late ’70s – they were admittedly pretty awful, due to inept management, indifferent build quality, and ham fisted attempts at cost reduction driven by the strong pound. The Japanese cars of the late ’70s might have been slightly better, but in the late ’70s the Japanese were still building unreliable, underpowered, rust prone little sh!t boxes – the really good Japanese cars didn’t show up until the mid ’80s. There’s a reason Murilee calls it the “Malaise Era”.

    • 0 avatar
      jeffzekas

      Having been to the UK several times, I would say Brits are EXTREMELY tolerant… more so than most Americans. And the comments made by Jeremy? I can’t speak for the English, but here in the USA we have the First Amendment, which protects the rights of EVERYONE to say what they feel, even ideas and words which scare others… as long as it isn’t slander, libel, or crying “fire” in a crowded theater! If you want mind control, move to Iran.

      • 0 avatar
        Conslaw

        Germany and Japan also have well-funded school systems that not only turn out good engineers and managers, but also mainstream workers who are able to adapt to changing technology. Their schools have well-paid, unionized, tenured teachers with pensions. They also have a culture where parents are expected to cooperate with the teachers as partners in educating the students rather than making the teachers and their unions scapegoats for kids who don’t learn. What these countries don’t have is the constant need to start oil wars and the belief that a CEO must make $100 million a year to be any good.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        Nobody once said that Clarkson didn’t have the “right” to say it, but in the sense of common decency and tolerance why would you want to? Lets say we were close friends and I picked one of your value judgments out and declared it so hideously wrong that you were less than human. It would bother you, probably so much so that it may in fact end our hypothetical relationship. These are the kinds of things that don’t NEED to be said though one has the right to them.

        Of course Clarkson also espouses nationalistic and quasi-racist remarks, which again he has the right to, nobody is saying he doesn’t, but to share them with the world reinforces them as an OK feeling to have when clearly they are NOT. Mind control? Not really, it’s called social stigma. You don’t want to have an unpopular view especially when it’s ethically unsound.

  • avatar
    ajla

    He likes Lancia though (I think), so he isn’t all bad.

  • avatar
    gslippy

    Some people choose to offend, and some people choose to be offended.

    It happens everywhere. When you choose to be offended, there is no end to the injustice you experience through mere words.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I suppose that if someone came up to your significant other and called her names, you wouldn’t “choose” to be offended? I would.

      This illustrates a simple point about being offensive people: it’s easy to “choose to not be offended” when they’re not saying offensive things about you or the people you love. Once THAT starts, you have every right to be offended.

      (I guess the only good news about Clarkson is that he is kinda funny…)

      • 0 avatar

        A striking public worker better be prepared to hear her true name.

      • 0 avatar
        gslippy

        @FreedMike: Sure, but the difference with Jeremy Clarkson is that I don’t have to watch him. People choose to watch his antics – knowing how he operates – and then whine about it.

        He’s not a street thug invading my privacy and verbally assaulting my family – he’s an entertainer I can turn off.

        The great thing about the US is the First Amendment right to free speech. Censor him, or Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh, and we’re in trouble. What little of Clarkson I’ve seen, I think is somewhat funny, including some of the comments in the above graphic.

        Several TTAC commentators have offended me with their comments, and I probably have done the same. But I don’t stay mad, since I come here freely and enjoy the discourse. Just mention unions, bailouts, religion, peak oil, global warming, or the Chevy Volt, and the flames automatically begin. It’s great.

      • 0 avatar
        Zackman

        @gslippy:

        I couldn’t agree more with what you say. I don’t watch “Top Gear”, so I’m not offended, but I watch very little to no TV at all because I find it boring. Music is what I like.

        The ONLY websites I belong to are TTAC and Curbside Classic, as I find these sites quite civil, even when a flame war erupts, as the posters are often humorous in presenting their arguments.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    I confess I really enjoy the show, but of the three presenters, I enjoy Clarkson the least. May and Hammond are much more fun. I’d buy either one a pint or two in a pub without a second thought. Clarkson would have to bring his own . . .

    My complaint against Clarkson is not that he’s politically incorrect, or even that he’s rather anti-American (certain movies stars which he fawns over excepted), but that he takes himself too seriously too much of the time. The other two have a fine sense of the absurdity of life, which I fine to be a typically English characteristic and also very charming.

    In taking himself too seriously, he does have something in common with Limbaugh and O’Reilly.

    • 0 avatar
      burgersandbeer

      “May and Hammond are much more fun. I’d buy either one a pint or two in a pub without a second thought. Clarkson would have to bring his own . . .”

      This is so true. Couldn’t think of a better way to describe it.

    • 0 avatar
      Les

      You think Clarkson takes himself too seriously…?

      Oh, oh I get it now… You just haven’t clued-in yet.

      Clarkson et. al. aren’t being themselves on Top Gear, thay’re each playing a part. The parts of cartoon caricatures of themselves. :D

      That’s what makes the show so entertaining, they’re ALL taking the piss. Out of who? EVERYONE, including/especially themselves/each-other. :)

  • avatar
    onthercks07

    Holy moley – people need to pull the broomsticks out of their butts and learn to live a little!

    The best thing about guys like Clarkson is that if you don’t like him, then you can just ignore him. As for me? It’s refreshing when a guy talks in public with the same candor with which a lot of us are thinking SOME of the time (obviously don’t agree with the majority of what he says). For god’s sake, I’m Korean and I thought the Hyundai comment was hilarious.

    If he gets muzzled then the world is all that much more boring. With all the PC-bs we all have to put up with now at work and the lip service we have to pay to hippies, environmental crazies, people in the South, movie stars, etc… just give me my 5 minutes with Clarkson thank you and leave us alone.

  • avatar
    carlisimo

    He’s insulted people who think like me quite a few times… but he never sounds all that serious about it. I still get a laugh out of it.

    There are other media figures who say equally provocative things, but they’re speaking to an audience who you sense would actually take those words to heart. That does scare me, and I would side with efforts to have those people’s wide-reaching pulpits removed. But Clarkson? Nah.

  • avatar
    The Doctor

    I’m deeply offended by the easily-offended, empty-lived, little piss-ants who pander to the media’s desire for a “moral issue” that is much easier to write column inches about than oh, I don’t know, real ****ing news.

    In keeping with their usual demands, nothing less than their unreserved apologies and summary dismissals from employment will satisfy the colossal sense of righteous indignation that I’ve worked hard to summon.

    Morons.

  • avatar
    jruhi4

    I’m surprised the anti-Mexican comments he made when reviewing the Mastretta GT didn’t make the list…

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Elon Musk had his complaints to.

    Jeremy spoke in class…today…

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    Some of Clarkson’s pearls of wisdom that I so fondly recall…

    1980′s Panthers are built like shit.

    You find the strangest things in Alabama.

    Chrysler Crossfires have the silhouette of a dog defecating.

    Pre-bankruptcy Cadillacs were cheap and annoying,

    The BBC is programmed by a bunch of people who aspire to be teenage lesbian surrogate mothers. (NOTE: I don’t believe it… but it is funny to think it.)

    Jaguars are competitive vehicles. (Ditto)

    London was a lot nicer without the ‘religious’ freaks. (He didn’t say it… but I am…)

    I’ll put it to everyone this way. In a state that managed to elect Newt Gingrich AND Cynthia McKinney. In a county that pasted evolution warning stickers on thousands of science textbooks. Heck, even in a town where the Sheriff gets fired for doing all the corrupt things that mayors here have done here since the Civil War days with complete impunity… I’ve learned to just laugh at it all.

    Clarkson? Offensive? Hell no! He’s not even from Georgia.

    He deserves all the impunity he can get! (Editor’s Note: Impunity means immunity here in the South… which is why many of us still call the Civil War, “The War Of Northern Aggression.”

  • avatar
    geggamoya

    His Highway Code is pure gold. It was in one of his columns from late 80s or early 90s, can’t find the correct book now to check exactly when. If this post is too long feel free to edit out the bottom half.

    The Highway Code is a very useful document but only if you accept that all other road users are friendly,cheery and obedient types of characters. Which the aren’t.
    So here is a real Highway Code for the real world.

    A Flash Of The Headlamps:
    Confusing, this, as it could mean any of four things: Hello. I am a friend of yours; Please feel free to pull out in front of me; Get out of your car and lets do pugilism; Look out, theres a Police radar trap ahead.

    The Horn:
    Much easier. if it’s a series of short toots, then somebody friendly is trying to attract your attention. Your response is an omni-directional wave. If it’s a prolonged burst, then somebody somewhere thinks your an onanist. Put your foot down and get out of there.

    Indicators:
    When the car in front is indicating left, beware. if it’s a Toyota with a large floppy aerial on the boot, then you are behind a taxi driver. A left-hand indicator could mean he is going straight on or right or even that he is not, in fact, going anywhere at all. what it definitely means is that he is NOT going left.

    Lane Discipline:
    In towns, when at a multi-lane junction with traffic lights, never, ever pull up behind a Nissan Micra. The driver will still be searching for his long-distance spectacles when the lights go green. then he will forget do depress the clutch before trying to select first. then he won’t have the strength to disengage the handbrake.

    Pedestrains:
    Run them down. Pedestrians must learn that they don’t pay road tax and have no right to be milling around on something that isn’t theirs.

    Cyclists:
    Run them down and to make sure, back up and run them down again. cyclists must be taught that they should stick to the side of the roadand not try and weave around in the middle of it. Some even believe they’re so fast that they’re not being an inconvenience. Run them down to prove them wrong.

    Trucks:
    Always give way to any vehicle that’s larger than yours.

    Speed Cameras:
    When you encounter a sign saying speed cameras are in operation, you can be assured of one thing. There are no speed cameras for a hundred miles, yust a few grey boxes with flash guns in them. Drive very, very fast indeed to prove to the locals that their experiment isn’t working

    Mobile Phones:
    When a Policeman apprehends you for using a phone while driving, explain that you can’t talk right now because you’re on the phone.

    Vans:
    If, on a narrow road, a van is coming the other way, it is your responsibility to get out of the way. Unless you mount the kerb on your side of the road, and then park up in someones garden, the van will remove your door mirror. if this happens, don’t get out of your car. At best , the van won’t stop. in which case you’llhave wasted your time. at worst, it will stop. then four baboons will climb out and beat you up a lot.

  • avatar
    johnhowington

    Jeremy will go down as one of the biggest trolls in history. I love him so much.

  • avatar
    VLS_GUY

    Thee best North American television celebrity that Jeromy Clarkson can be compared to is Don Cherry. Both make outlandish statements that harken back to a golden age that never was. Both the BBC and CBC are broadcasters with the firm knowledge that both of these clowns gain viewers solely due to those curious to see that they will say next. Remember their is no such thing as good or bad publicity in the media; just publicity…

    • 0 avatar
      PenguinBoy

      Never thought of that before – but think you are right!

      The only difference is Don Cherry has *much* better fashion sense…

      • 0 avatar
        VLS_GUY

        Yes dandy Don Cherry does have the sense of style usually associated with a retired pimp… Clarkson on the other hand makes gives the illusion of sanity though a normal, conservative fashion sense. Don is the better clown hands down due to a better clown suit.

  • avatar
    Hogun

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HJP0WXyeaA

    I think having the whole context of his quote makes it fairly clear that it was joke.

    • 0 avatar
      geggamoya

      Thanks for posting that. Even though that is still not the whole interview(could not find it either) it does put the quote into perspective. If it wasn’t clear before, it should be clear now that he is joking. Or making a point, just exaggerating quite a bit. Like

      No sh*tstorm would have happened if he had just said that it was nice and quiet in town because of the strike, but in the name of fairness he would like to poke the strikers in the eye with a really hot french frie. That would just have been weird, not nearly as funny and nobody would be arguing about this on the internet.

      I wonder if the people who were offended by this remark actually watched the show, or did they just hear someone tell them what he said and then write an angry letter to the BBC? Im guessing the latter for the most part.

    • 0 avatar
      rpn453

      Glad you provided that link. Very, very, very obviously a joke.

      Great quotes, all of them. Clarkson is highly entertaining. I prefer listening to people who don’t censor themselves.

  • avatar
    daveainchina

    In an age of supposed tolerance, why is it that people are so intolerant of other ideas, jokes or not?

    He’s an entertainer who makes his money being off-color. People need to lighten up and learn to laugh at themselves more.

    Society is just too sensitive, time to grow up a little people and get adult type thick skins. And for @$$#@ sakes, laugh more.

    • 0 avatar
      Xeranar

      . . .The inverse tolerance! I should tolerate insulting remarks about organized labor, my ethnic background, my race, my sex, and above all everything I may or may not stand for because somebody out there found it funny! I’ll be damned, why am I not tolerant of that? Oh that’s right because what people are asking for in tolerance is that you don’t call them racial slurs, make homophobic remarks, and in general make their lives that much more uncomfortable because you have an undying need to insult those who are different.

      PS: Adults with thick skins are a myth, you know it, I know it. Don’t pretend if I didn’t come to your house and find something you love and insult it I wouldn’t get a rise out of you.

      • 0 avatar
        drivelikejehu

        Clarkson came to your house?

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        Clarkson is merely a string of intolerant assholes who are given a voice in the media. He’s the public face to a problem of intolerance. It’s easy to say “well he’s on TV…I can turn him off” but if you ask yourself “what does he really stand for and who is he influencing?” you end up with a deeper issue. Clarkson indirectly comes to my house, meets me on the street, and interferes with my life by existing and having a public voice.

      • 0 avatar

        People like you are always insulted because they want to be.
        Here is another opportunity for you: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24017334-row-over-clarksons-suicide-comment.do
        Enjoy your halo.

      • 0 avatar
        rpn453

        I should tolerate insulting remarks about organized labor, my ethnic background, my race, my sex, and above all everything I may or may not stand for because somebody out there found it funny!

        No, of course the government shouldn’t allow you to be exposed to that stuff. He should be locked away or heavily censored. His books should be burned too. Come up with a list of other books and media that bothers you, and we’ll burn them all to make you happy.

        I’d hope I wouldn’t invite someone like you to my house in the first place, but if I made that mistake I’d just throw you out when I realized it.

    • 0 avatar
      rentonben

      Well put!

      Sadly, there’s a culture of sissies that pretend to be offended so that they can attempt to control what other people say.

  • avatar

    I’d have them all shot

    Perhaps not shot but I’m not entirely convinced that public employees shouldn’t have to give up the right to vote in exchange for their generous salaries, overly generous pensions and near sinecure status for their positions with almost no accountability.

    If you took a vote, I’d bet that the public would agree that public employees should not have the right to strike against the public. At the very least the current corrupt practice of public employee unions making political contributions should end. It should be illegal for any non-elected public employee or public employee union to make a political contribution.

    As for Clarkson, I love British cars but I never caught the Top Gear fanboy bug. I did catch a segment of Top Gear USA where they were driving old 4X4s towing campers up a serious off road trail. Pretty funny. As for the Car Show on Speed, I think it’d be a lot funnier if it was on HBO and Adam Carolla wasn’t constrained by the censors. His CarCasts, though, tend to be puff pieces. At the LA Auto Show while discussing Lotus and the Evora, he was riffing on the Lotus 26R, the racing version of the Elan, which regularly kicks his butt in vintage racing, and how it has less power but can go through the turns much faster than much more powerful cars because it’s light and handles. Everything that he said was true but in the context of Lotus abandoning the whole simplicate and add lightness thing under Dany Behar, like I said, a puff piece.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      @Ronnie:
      “At the very least the current corrupt practice of public employee unions making political contributions should end. It should be illegal for any non-elected public employee or public employee union to make a political contribution.”

      I’ll make you a deal: we put together a bill that outlaws that, along with political contributions from corporations who do business with the government.

      Shake on it?

      • 0 avatar

        I’m no fan of crony capitalism, but then when you make the government bigger and stronger, you increase the chances of crony capitalism and rent seeking. Actually, I have no problem with any group banding together to make political contributions, but since lefties are always whining about “billionaires” and other rich folks supposedly “buying” the political process (conveniently forgetting about billionaires like Peter Lewis and Steve Bing who give big bux to Dems) I figure why not hoist them on their own petards?

        The left would be hurt much more by a ban on union political contributions than the right would be by a ban on corporate contributions. The dollar figures currently skew way over to the Dems. Only two of the top 20 donors since 1989 are companies, ATT and Goldman Sachs. Thirteen of the top 20 donors are labor unions.

        I’m not so sure that you’d want to make that deal. That would be like trading Fox News for the NYT, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, CBS etc.

        I prefer a system where people can financially support the candidates and issues they want to support. If that means that unions and corporations can make political contributions, so be it. But if you’re going to ban contributions by corporations, I can assure you that in Lansing, there are incorporation papers bearing the name of the United Auto Workers.

        Making a political contribution is free speech. Lobbying is petitioning the government for redress of grievances. It’s almost impossible to regulate contributions and lobbying without butting up against the First Amendment.

    • 0 avatar
      AC

      What Clarkson said was incredibly funny, yet some of the uninformed anti union, anti public worker bigotry that I read here simply isn’t. The difference is that Jeremy Clarkson is self deprecating in his humor. His Tory leanings are clear, as clear as the fact that he isn’t seriously advocating for the execution of government workers.

      • 0 avatar

        Since you were replying to me, please explain how anything that I said constituted “anti public worker bigotry”?

      • 0 avatar
        AC

        Anti public worker bigotry might be defined as a desire to strip away the civil rights of people who work for the government. These include the right to vote, the right to bargain collectively over workplace rules, in general the same rights enjoyed by private workers. In general government salary and benefit packages are in line with the private sector, when similar skills and education levels are compared. I saw this while working for the state of Wisconsin where many left for the private sector and doubled or tripled their salaries. This was well before the protests when we still had a union. Like others with marketable job skills I did the same. Now, without a union, it’s only gotten worse for the people who stayed, so bad that people are still able to leave for better salaries despite the recession. It wasn’t the public we wanted to be protected from, or have the right to strike against, it was the politicians.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        Every one of those 24 karat benefits that public unions strike against “the politicians” to protect is paid for by the public.

        Every one of those services that’s put on hold while unions put on a show of organized extortion is (putatively) for the public.

        The bottom line is a private sector that can only dream of 30 year job security followed by paid retirement in your 50s can hardly be expected to be sympathetic to union demands for even more.

      • 0 avatar

        AC, only one of those things you mentioned is a right, the right to vote. There is no right to collective bargaining beyond rights of assembly and rights of contract. What you want is a state enforced monopoly on labor.

        Is the federal Hatch Act “anti public worker bigotry”? It denies some political rights to federal employees.

        You want the perks of public employment, the benefits of public employment, plus all the actual rights and made up rights you now claim, of regular folks. But then you’re like my local public information director who claims he’s saving the city money by collecting a pension and salary at the same time.

        It’s an interesting phenomenon with tax feeding renting public employee leech parasites. Some of them admit they are better paid and get better benefits because, they claim, they are better educated, more skilled than regular folks in the private sector. In other words, they think they’re better than the public. Other tax feeders deny they are better paid or that they have better job security or any other factual advantage public sector workers have. Heads they win, tails we lose.

        If you’re a public employee, you work for the public, not your union steward, not your agency head, not a politician. When you strike, you strike against the public. Deny it all you want. Insist that you aren’t selfish and greedy, like everyone else, all you want. The facts are the facts.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        It is good that people are waking up to the corruption of public employee unions. They buy politicians who give them other taxpayers’ money(and futures at this point) in exchange for their votes and support. It is a closed loop system of graft that destroys the opportunities and lifestyles of people who aren’t part of the corruption.

  • avatar
    AC

    In his response to Jeremy Clarkson, did George Michael really use an offensive term for a body part most often compared with the front of a Subaru Tribeca? I’m outraged, and amused, mostly amused.

  • avatar
    Joss

    “.. their average passenger car was 20+ years behind the equivalent American or even Japanese model.. ”

    Issigonis Mini? Pesky Jaguar @ the 55 Le Mans with all-wheel disc brakes? The Jensen Interceptor smart tart?. New wave Range Rover in 1970?

    ” ..No. It was the unions that killed the British car industry.. ”

    nationalization & unions.

    “.. Pre-bankruptcy Cadillacs were cheap and annoying.. ”

    Bet Clarkson’s hardly driven any on the Isle of Man, what the heck would he know?

    “.. Jeremy Clarkson can be compared to is Don Cherry.. ”

    more Harry Truman – he’d drop the bomb.

    • 0 avatar
      Xeranar

      Honestly Joss, outside of the Jaguar SS, the Jensen Interceptor, and the Range Rover Britain didn’t make many exceptional cars. You claim the mini, I point out that in 1959 any number of American made cars could surpass it in luxury, power, and arguably handling. The Thunderbird could certainly have given a mini a fight in a larger American-style highway setting. The US car companies didn’t really make an equivalent-sized vehicle so where the mini’s advantage in handling is due more to it’s compact size and I give you rubber ball bushings it doesn’t really surpass the corvette, corvair Monza, Ford Thunderbird, or a shorter handful of speedy roadsters still coming out from tiny manufacturers in the US.

      The British Motor Industry was crushed due to a lack of design development compared to their American rivals in all but the most expensive models. A Range Rover in the 1970s still didn’t have a cost-equivalent from the US market though the Jeep Wrangler was arguably as sure-footed as the older models and the Toyota Land Cruiser (I forget the true Japanese name) was doing the same job. Nothing is every purely black and white, I was pointing out that it had a greater affect on their decline than wildcat strikes every could do.

      • 0 avatar
        ExPatBrit

        “You claim the mini, I point out that in 1959 any number of American made cars could surpass it in luxury, power, and arguably handling”.

        That is probably the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard.

        The Mini was conceived as an economy car, it sold extremely with the exception of North America (5.3 million units) and was produced in half a dozen or more factories worldwide.

        Please name any “similar” US vehicle available at the time that did that.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        5.3 million units over 41 years? Model T, Model A, Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Taurus, Fairlane, Impala..The list goes on. The basic mini sold relatively unchanged for 41 years. The advantage it had in handling was due to the fact it’s little larger than a go-kart compared to 1959 American cars. The Nash and then AMC Rambler had similar numbers over the years and arguably was in the same handling category. North America is famous for having very individual car design but during the 1950s some models were produced in multiple factories of course River Rouge was roughly the size of all 6 of the mini factories, so you need to keep that in mind..

      • 0 avatar
        ExPatBrit

        The Mini was an economy car conceived because of the Suez crisis.

        None of those car meet that criteria in 1959, which is what you posted.

        What next, the Jaguar XKE wasn’t as good a pickup truck as the Ford F100.

        Or maybe, the MGB has a small trunk unlike the Ford Galaxie.

        We get that you don’t like Clarkson , British humor doesn’t always translate well.

        No reason to run down an entire nation, and yes it was industrial strife, poor management leading to understandable consequent lack of investment that took them down.

        If it weren’t for those original Italian and British designs there might be no sports cars.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      In his documentary ‘Who Killed the British Car Industry?’ which is just what it sounds like, he goes through a lot of the different reasons the British car industry ceased to exist.
      Unions and strikes are mentioned, but also compared to the Japanese unions and strikes, and they were not the only thing to say it the least. if one chooses to take everything he says out of context and choose to believe that it’s an actual standpoint he has, you must either be utterly insane, or believe that he is …
      I don’t think he could possibly be unfair towards US cars, and he has even bought a Ford GT, twice :P

  • avatar
    astrocortex

    If he offends you, turn off his show, stop reading his columns and books and get on with your life. Nobody is forcing the 350,000,000 viewers to watch his show.

  • avatar
    Amendment X

    There’s nothing more pathetic than a man who gets his panties into a knot over a joke. To those of you who are offended by Clarkson’s commentary, get a life.

    Stop pretending Clarkson isn’t an equal opportunity offender. Anyone who watches Top Gear knows Clarkson loves picking on Americans too. Although they are usually over the top ridiculous, there’s always a kernel of truth to them.

  • avatar
    mwood10

    Of course, not one of the people making these complaints has actually watched the clip in question. To quote the Daily Mail:

    “He started by saying he liked the strikers, because the industrial action had meant there was no traffic on the roads.

    But after insisting he had to be balanced as he worked for the impartial BBC, he launched into a satirical rant.

    He said: ‘Frankly, I would have them shot. I would have them taken outside and executed in front of their families.’”

  • avatar
    alan996

    Growing up on the south side I learned the following at a very young age; it has served me well. If they can’t handle it you don’t want to deal with them.

    “F__K ‘em if they can’t take at joke.”

  • avatar
    jaje

    You’d be surprised how offended people get when you talk about them but they’ll laugh all day long when you make fun of someone else. It is like Isaac Haye’s portrayal of Chef in South Park loving it when SP lampooned the various religions until the show did an episode about the one he practiced and actually spilled the beans on a national audience of their core beliefs. Then he became a critic and quit / was fired from the show.

    Brit humor often crosses lines as the public there has a wider latitude of stunts and jokes. He does walk that line from time to time but the BBC knows he brings in a very wide audience and is watched in about every country in the world (often many copy the shows format to make their own as well).

  • avatar
    Beerboy12

    Clarkson Rocks! What are we talking about here? Because the day Clarkson is muzzled is a sad day for the world.

  • avatar
    sfdennis1

    Clarkson IS a pig-ugly homophobic tw*t, AND a boorish arrogant blowhard, a racist prikk, a do*chbaag for hire, and a hypocrite who sucks on the government’s teat himself, etc etc etc.

    And it’s his schtick. What actual percentage of his mouth-farts are truly believed VS. mere ‘performance art’ only he knows.

    His main saving graces are that he is an equal opportunity offender, many of his assessments are clearly delusional, and he mostly avoids spewing his vitriol in an attempt to influence public policy, elections, or national interests. He has also shown a willingness to play the fool, which helps in taking some the sting off of his various insults and barbs.

    And just as he has ‘the right’ to blather on and play the insult comic/clown, ANYONE who finds him offensive should have the right to give it back to him, return volley with an insult/reply or comment on his unfortunate appearance, change the channel, etc.

    It’s been quite a while since I’ve found his schtick fresh or very entertaining, but, to me at least, he’s no real threat to tolerance. There are too many REAL tinfoil hat wearing, foaming-at-the-mouth nutters out there for Clarkson’s as8hattery to matter much.

  • avatar

    Don’t forget, them Brits got powerful libel laws, which is why Jeremy gets them so easily.

    Ie., Hello! magazine

  • avatar

    Clarkson says his favorite vehicle of 2012 is the Evoque.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    Top Gear UK is to automotive journalism as Jeffrey Dahmer is to fine dining. The show is scripted and stunt drivers do the drifting scenes. I don’t mind this because of my short attention span and it’s always better to have a racist, homophobe hosting than not. Jeremy needs to pick up his sexist pig act however.

  • avatar
    Zykotec

    I think he hides his homophobia very well btw :P

  • avatar
    astrocortex

    I can only imagine what some of the people in this thread would think of shows like Tosh.O…

  • avatar
    acuraandy

    05-Feb-08 … “America: 250 million wankers living in a country with no word for wanker.”

    And don’t forget the trip across the South US when he plastered on the side of his car ‘Hillary Clinton for President’…and the crew almost got shot by ‘The Boys’…

    With that said, STILL among my favorite journalists of all time.

    I can’t wait for the new series.

  • avatar
    car_guy2010

    I just see Clarkson as another pig-ugly (thank you George Michael for that insult) Brit with a sense of humor that some people just don’t get.

    That being said, I do think that celebrities have a responsibility to set a good example for the foaming masses that love them. Insulting politicians, while very humorous (honestly, I LOL’ed), can draw attention away from issues that affect everyday people.

    I would much prefer that Clarkson focus on his role on “Top Gear” and save his dry little quips for a circle of sycophants that he no doubt frequents.

  • avatar
    Contrarian

    Thanks for sharing, there are a couple there I hadn’t heard. But his all time best was relating how an emerging 3rd world nation’s cars were “made by people in the jungle who wear leaves for shoes”. Priceless!

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    It seems like Clarkson simply has a mind from another era, an era that could simply laugh and not get fussy about the remarks of an old yellow-toothed man.

    Though when it comes to Marina fans (and fans of other crummy cars), I can somewhat see why they’d get angry when Jeremy destroys one of their beloved scrap-wagons, but half of the time they’re probably worn out so whats the problem?

    If you don’t want him destroying another AustinMorrisYugo than buy ‘em up!

  • avatar
    Junebug

    My boss got me watching Top Gear UK, he’s a good man! I went to the web site and read every single one of Clarkson’s commentaries, it took a while to get though all them and I enjoyed every minute. I can’t understand what the fuss is about.

  • avatar
    Les

    All I know is if Jeremy Clarkson pokes One More Corvette in it’s Bum I’m gonna snap! *RRRRRRAAAAAGEE!!& >:(


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India