"The Slaves came to America to be FREE"

[Drake Tungsten]

Do you disagree that it wasn;t poorly written?

The only real problem was the use of "steadfast" instead of "steadfastness." A pretty small mistake for a speech and hardly an issue worth discussing, unless you have an obsessive vendetta against Bush.

[GePap]

Actually, the problem goes beyond that: as the sentence is written it is possible to think that he is saying the slaves were like any other immigrants, that they went voluntarilly, and becuase of thier characteristics, changed America. You could substitute any word for slaves, like "Italians", "irish", so forth, and the sentence works (beyond the funky steadfast), while in reality, the coming of the slaves was distinct enough that it really should not be possible to substitute any immigrant group for slave and still have the sentence work.

And no, as much as I utterly dispise this admin., and hope every day that it's regin of error ends in 2005, I have no Vendetta againts Bush here.

[Drake Tungsten]

as the sentence is written it is possible to think that he is saying the slaves were like any other immigrants, that they went voluntarilly, and becuase of thier characteristics, changed America.

Only if you're so stupid as to not remember how slaves got to America. I think the Bush speechwriters assumed that everyone would already know that slaves came to America involuntarily, thereby eliminating the need for Bush to state this obvious fact. I fail to see how this was a mistake or an example of bad speech-writing.

[GePap]

First of all, Never assume anything (Why did Bush keep repeating that we would win the war, we would suceed? Would anyone in thier right mind think that Bush did not alrewady think we would, hence we are going in?) of the audience, specially with a sentence that is so sloppy and easy to misinterpret.

This is just poor speechwriting.

[Drake Tungsten]

Why did Bush keep repeating that we would win the war, we would suceed? Would anyone in thier right mind think that Bush did not alrewady think we would, hence we are going in?

He repeated the obvious to reinforce the purpose behind his war speeches, ie. "we're going to kick ass."

The purpose of the speech in Senegal was to improve relations, not to open up old wounds, so why would Bush specifically mention the obvious history behind slavery? It was smart speech-writing; talk about the positive contributions of slaves to American society while avoiding mention of the darker side of that exchange. Perfectly suited for the purpose behind Bush's speech.

[Uncle Sparky]

Dubbya is an idiot. He probably has illegals working his Crawford plantation.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
He repeated the obvious to reinforce the purpose behind his war speeches, ie. "we're going to kick ass."

The purpose of the speech in Senegal was to improve relations, not to open up old wounds, so why would Bush specifically mention the obvious history behind slavery? It was smart speech-writing; talk about the positive contributions of slaves to American society while avoiding mention of the darker side of that exchange. Perfectly suited for the purpose behind Bush's speech.

He was speaking to embassy staff. And no, poor sentences do not equal smart speechwritting. You seem to be going out of your way to defend what is a goof, for seemingly no other reaosn than to back the admin on this no matter what. Bush said a goofy sentence, as he is sadly all to likely to do. The fact that is stood out enoguh for Sava to pick it out (given how many little speeches big speecehrs Bush is making on this trip, only highlights that it was a goof.

You gain no points by trying to make Bush all of a sudden seem like a brilliant speaker: few of his own allies think so, and with sentecnes like this as your backing, you are not likely to get very far.

If you don;t think it was a goof, well, good for you, just say it: But again, you aren't going to convince anyone that this is "smart speech-writting".

[Drake Tungsten]

Bush said a goofy sentence

I fail to see how the sentence is goofy.

It's very interesting when you think about it, the slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfastness and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America.

Fix the "steadfast" problem and you have a perfectly good sentence. Don't know what you're on about.

You gain no points by trying to make Bush all of a sudden seem like a brilliant speaker

I'm doing no such thing. Bush is a horrible public speaker. He does have good speech-writers, however, which is apparent if you can work your way through all the verbal gaffes Bush makes.

[Berzerker]

A pretty small mistake for a speech and hardly an issue worth discussing, unless you have an obsessive vendetta against Bush.

Pegged.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
The only real problem was the use of "steadfast" instead of "steadfastness." A pretty small mistake for a speech and hardly an issue worth discussing, unless you have an obsessive vendetta against Bush.

Hence my first post as a response to Sava.

[Jaguar]

Sava, put the last three words of the sentence in your quote. I hope you don't mind, as you of course wouldn't want to mislead people about what was said, would you?

[Boris Godunov]

This is silly.

Grammatically, Bush's sentence does NOT imply that slaves went to America voluntarily, unless you don't understand the use of commas in English sentences.

Yes, it should be "steadfastness," but that's the only thing wrong with it, grammatically.

However, the sentence is still offensive because he waters down how they came here ("left" is rather innocuous, isn't it? How about "forcibly ripped away from their homes?"), references the conversion of the "savages" to Christianity and implies that America was better off because of slavery. Sounds like the typical racist excuse for why slavery shouldn't be apologized for, since White men ultimately made life better for the savages and saved their souls, while they helped make us a greater power.

That's what to get offended over, not some false idea that he said they came here voluntarily.

[Jac de Molay]

Bush needs to seriously get some better speechwriters.

It's awkward and easy to misinterpret ("left here to go to America"?? -Wtf? I dont remember there being a pilgrimage.). At its worst, it's just plain ineloquent.

I could teach a retarded chimp to write better speeches that.

[S. Kroeze]

But we are so honored to start our trip to this continent here in Senegal. I had the opportunity to go out to Goree Island and talk about what slavery meant to America. It's very interesting when you think about it, the slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfast and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America. America is what it is today because of what went on in the past. Yet when I looked out over the sea, it reminded me that we've always got to keep history in mind. And one of the things that we've always got to know about America is that we love freedom, that we love people to be free, that freedom is God's gift to each and every individual. That's what we believe in our country.

Let's assume Bush said: '...because of their steadfastness and their faith and their belief in freedom, helped change America.'

Which religion/faith?

Would Bush know that the slaves shipped out of Africa were NO Christians? (my guess: no, Bush doesn't know this)
Or is he suggesting that the black slaves were lucky because in America they became Christians?

Let's assume Bush said while he was in Auschwitz:
'I had the opportunity to go out to this concentration camp and talk about what the Holocaust meant to America. It's very interesting when you think about it, the Jews who were gassed here, because of their steadfastness and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped create the state of Israel and change the Middle East.'


How low can one fall?

[DinoDoc]

You people are wierd.