Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Okay, I give up! Just what is the name of this decade?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
RedCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:12 AM
Original message
Okay, I give up! Just what is the name of this decade?
We had our 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's.

What is this decade to be called then? The "nothing" decade?

And don't give me that "today" stuff. That is so Bushlike crazy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
chickenscratching Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. 21st Century?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. "The Head Firmly Up Our Ass" decade?
Would be my guess.

Or maybe something about a rear view mirror.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
3. Oh Oh
I would say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwmason Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. I've heard it called the naughties
It follows logically after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indy_azcat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
5. Millenium? Naughts?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
6. Oh, This is the "Aughts".
You know... Like "Back in aught four... We done lost
the election again."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
7. the redux decade
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tk2kewl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
8. with bushCo in charge we should call it the "zeroes"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
9. I've been trying to figure that out
though if it makes you feel any better Bush will probably destroy the world before the decade is over so it shouldn't matter to much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
10. oughts
Much like "they ought not pee on my leg and tell me it's raining", or if you prefer, Jethro and his double ought spy comparison.

This is generation "Oh no they didn't" by the way. We've had "baby boomers", "generation x", "generation y", ... now we have "generation "Oh no they didn't".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. So we skipped generation Z?
Where is the consistency?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. rule one
#1 Bush is in charge.

#2 Something just doesn't sound right, see rule 1.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kick-ass-bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
11. The naughts.
like the haves and the have-naughts.
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldLeftieLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
12. "The End"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
13. The Return of the Robber Barons decade?
Ken Lay, the guy from Tyco, the Kozlowski guy, $25 billion in net profit for ExxonMobil, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
14. The dueces...
or maybe the doozies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
15. The "Nothings"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
16. the 00's 'Aughts' or 'Oughts' if you are feeling archaic

The aughts. Neat word aught, it comes from naught, by way of Metanalysis, oed: 'a reinterpretation of the division between words or syntactic units'

'naught' meaning nothing. the phrase is reinterpreted by listeners who heard the phrase 'a naught' to be 'an aught'. Thus the word lost it's initial n.

Same for 'adder', which used to be 'nadder'.
Words can get the n from 'an' as well, 'nickname', which used to be 'ekename'. 'an ekename' became 'a nickname'.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
19. The "Oh-ohs."
Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
20. i think of them as the aughts
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TripAndFall Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
21. Ted
<a href="http://hookedonphoniks.blogspot.com/">Damned If I Know</a>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
22. 1900-1909 was always refered to
as the "19 hundreds". So, 2000-2009 should be the "20 hundreds".:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC