I have absolutely no right to point fingers at any individual and say that they cannot spell, since I am poor in that department. But I do say that American English seems to be a ‘lazy evaluation’ version of the English language. 
To spell color without a ‘u’? Why on earth? Because of the effort required? This and decisions like it seem to have been arrogant and ignorant ones. What you think?
Well, if as I suspect, the word started out as color in Latin, why on earth did the Brits make it more difficult by inserting a letter? Oh, nevermind. I just answered my own question.
The “lazy” comment doesn’t work on several levels. The “u” was dropped from color, harbor, and similar words deliberately by Webster as he attempted (rather successfully) to create an “American” English. As samclem noted, he was partially influenced by looking to ancient Latin roots. (He might be criticized for dropping the u when he should have dropped the o according to American pronunciation, but his observance of etymologies precluded that.)
On the other hand, the Brits have a long tradition of mocking American English for using words that are too long or complex. The classic jibe came from G.K. Chesterton who remarked on the ease of a Brit driving his car home, then taking the lift to his flat while the poor American had to drive home in an automobile and take an elevator to his apartment.
Whatever has driven the development of American English, it is far too simplistic to claim that it is powered by “laziness.”
Perhaps Mr. Webster dropped the “u” in “colour” because it is, oh, I don’t know, unnecessary???
Webster was trying to make the language a little more modern; spellings were lagging behind pronounciation. He was also interested in increasing literacy among immigrants. He wanted to make the language easier to learn.
On “laziness” in language: A lot of languages go the easy route phonetically in their evolutions (yes, i know in the example of “colour” it’s just orthographic). Lets look at the Romance languages. Some of the things the modern Romance languages (well, going back to Vulgar Latin) did were things like dropping of intertonic vowels:
And metathesis (reordering of consonants so things like “difficult” clusters are easier to pronounce):
So, because these developments happened does that make the Romance Languages lazy descendants of Vulgar Latin?
But, the dropping of u in words like color was intentional, and served to help separate American English from Latin.
It’s me you’re talking about, isn’t it?
I’m FROM a country that uses the U, and even I don’t understand your point.
The purpose of written language is to convey information. It doesn’t really matter a hell of a lot whether you have a U in “honour” or not, as lot as there’s some agreement as to whether or not there is one.
It’s just as valid to criticize the British for having the “u”. Who says British English is “correct”? This isn’t French, with centrally determined, inflexible rules; it a language of pure expression and convenience, and if it changes, terrific.
Actually, when I was in elementary school in Canada, the “u” in colour, harbour, rumour, and the like, was absolutely necessary. If they weren’t spelled with the “u”, the teacher marked the spelling as wrong.
Anyway. I’ve also heard that Webster set out to make the spellings simpler, both for the convenience of those new to the English language and for the sake of simplicity. He succeeded in the US, but his ideas failed to catch on elsewhere, at least in the past.
Nowadays, who knows? With the immediacy of written information–from the Internet and other media–I think we’re all pretty familiar with American spellings, and they are so common that they likely wouldn’t upset those who are used to the British spellings.
But nonetheless, I’m just so used to using the spellings I learned at school that I’ll continue to do so in my own personal writing. Don’t believe any rumors you hear about me doing otherwise. 
spooje said:
No, no, no, no, spooje!!! Its ME.
YUO=FAGOT
L33T HAXORZ LIEK ME DUON’T NEDE TO SPEL.
i love jeff k.
GET IN MY EAR, PANTS!!!
Actually I think colour looks nicer than color. But,it is obviously not really necessary.
So while we’re on the subject what about the English spelling thins in ways that have nothing to do with their pronuciation. Like “Thames”.
And what about zed? How come every single other letter gets by pronounced without an additional consonant and zee needs a “D”?
WHAT THE HELL IS UP WITH ZED?
Well, he got mixed up with them gypsy girls and then he was caught out by the haymow with the vicar’s oldest daughter and . . . . OH, you weren’t talkin’ 'bout Zedediah, were ya?
Actually, I’m perfectly content with the content of the the English language. Should we alternate the spelling of words merely to an alternate usage, or can we just say attribute the words to having different attributes? Look, excuse me for being deliberate here, but I don’t think that having us deliberate on these matters is any excuse. I grow number just knowing that anyone can pick on a minute point of the English language and I have to spend quite a number of minutes trying to justify it. The end result is this: if you can’t come to me with a record of times Americans refused to spell correctly, I shall have to record here and for all time that your claim is a pile of refuse.
And if you even try to debate the logic held within, I can guarantee you I won’t shed a tear when I tear you a new asshole.
ZED
British spoken form of the letter z 15th century, from Old French zede via late Latin from Greek zeta so blame them furriners.
and that was fun, EnderW23
betenoir:
The Master himself has commented on Zed:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mzed.html
The long and short of it is: We pronounce it “Zee” so it makes the song work.
I agree. A language is made to accomodate the communication needs of its speakers, not the reverse. American English and British English both work well enough on that count. Certainly there’s no call to declare one superior to the other because it omits, adds, or reverses letters in any particular word.
PS: EAT A BAG OS HELL< CLIFFY B!!!
Has SD staff member Ian gotten a promotion?
“q, r, s, t, v,
just keep singing and you’ll see
if you only use your head
there’s w, x and y and zed.”
Or maybe they can work in a few lines about the dangers of American cultural hegemony.
But, if zeta evolved into zed, why didn’t beta become bed? Is all I’m saying. Ok, I know that doesn’t have an answer. Unless it’s just that it doesn’t get used much (certainly not after that scathing review from Shakespear.)
Anybody want to explain Thames?
“If you do not use zed
I shall bop you on your head!”
Hey, it works! ::Runs, runs, runs like a constipated wiener-dog!::
[Al Mode]Hey, you’ve got weasels on your face.[/Al Mode]