How gaffes are, and aren't analysed

[pecunium]

George Bush just said the troops aren't Americans.

Now, I don't think he meant that, any more than Kerry meant they were stupid, but he said it more clearly than Kerry did.

He's giving a press conference and he said that the first audience (for statements about the war, from the Oval Office, and from Capitol Hill) was the American People, and the second audience was the troops, and their families.

I think I can say no one is going to treat him to the same sort of roasting that Kerry got, or to that Biden got, or that any Democrat gets, when such clumsy locutions get used.

That's probably because we have a liberal media that won't cut the Republicans, esp. the president, any slack.

Comments

[sinboy.livejournal.com]

I hope someone you-tubes it.

[karl-lembke.livejournal.com]

There is a transcript available here (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16697835.htm). The statement in question is about 17% of the way down the page:

BUSH: Oh yeah. The only thing I can tell you is that, when I speak, I'm very conscious about the audiences that are listening to my words.

You know, the first audience, obviously, is the American people. My second audience would be the troops and their families. That's why I appreciate the question about the troops' morale. It gave me a chance to talk to the families and how proud we are of them.

I suppose one could assume Bush is thinking of the two different audiences as disjoint sets (that is, no one who is in one set – "Americans" is in the second set – "the troops and their families". It would be as much of a reach as the famous Groucho Marx line, "what the elephant was doing in my pajamas, I'll never know".

I don't see how anyone can twist the statement into a claim that Bush said the troops weren't Americans without displaying a single-digit IQ. Kerry's "botched joke", on the other hand, is, at best, a lot more ambiguous.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

Maybe Keith Olbermann will mention it.

[pracuel.livejournal.com]

he also said- "US troops are counting on Congress to provide them the funds they need to win."

Ya right- didn't we win when we removed the Saddam regime and disbanded his army?

What is it we will win?

More needless troop deaths

The troops counted on the Republican controlled Congress and Rummy to make sure things like armoured Humvies, body armour and other things were provided to keep them safe....we know that didn't happen.

Where are them Dems telling us that Bush is full of crap- we know where the money will go...in the past few weeks stories and investigations have disclosed how our tax dollars have made the rich richer and pissed away at the expense of the troops.

[wylderwynd.livejournal.com]

I am particularly fond of how this administration has consistently shifted the onus for the fiasco that is Iraq onto everyone but themselves. They seem oblivious to the fact that we all now know that the reasons for going into Iraq were bogus. It reminds me of a statement another man I despise said once, something about if you tell a lie enough times...?

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

This seems about on a par with Kerry's use of "in" rather than "with" -- an easy verbal mistake to make. And saying something like "the American people ... and that subset of them that includes the troops & their families" just it's Bush's Style.

But then, I was puzzled by the flap about Kerry's joke (and the ineptness of claiming that it was "botched"). Some blogger who'd been there posted the entire thing, from notes, a few hours after the event. The joke was, IIRC, four paragraphs long. The first three specifically or blatantly ridiculed Mr. Bush, and I don't see how there could be any doubt in any reasonable person's mind that the fourth paragraph was the culmination of this series, also referring to his want of intellectual application.



Oh, wait... "reasonable" , and this was in a Political conext ... okay. *sigh*

[karl-lembke.livejournal.com]

True, the fact that his comment followed three paragraphs of barbs aimed at Bush would indicate that he was (with a high probability) still referring to Bush in the fourth.

Unless, of course, it was a barb aimed at those too stupid to avoid being dragged along with him.

As I wrote above, "at best, ambiguous".

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

Yes, you would say "at best, ambiguous", of course. And I would say: " At worst, ambiguous." -- though that would be a stretch. I don't think Kerry would've made a Great President, but I'm sure he has enough political savvy to not insult people, such as the military & their families, who might possibly vote for him. Unpopular politicians of the opposing party, yes, but not potential votes. (to put it in crassly political terms).

Your suggestion that "it was a barb aimed at those too stupid to avoid being dragged along with [Bush]" is ... interesting, but Kerry is ex-Mil himself, proud of his service, fully aware that the Military are no more stupid than college undergraduates (the audience he was addressing), and understands that the Military serve -- laying down their lives, if need be -- wherever they're sent. I much doubt that Kerry sees, any more than I do, any "stupid" in there, at all. Perhaps someone who sees anything but pure self-interest to be stupid might, but Kerry doesn't strike me as being that kind of person. Your mileage obviously varies.

[moropus.livejournal.com]

Whatever else Bush may or may not be, he is not a public speaker. he sucks at giving speeches. he puts his foot in his mouth, he looks like he's about to have a panic attack, slurs words to the point that people I know speculate that he is drunk or on drugs again.