Monday, 18 February 2002 : "deflation != devaluation"I want a president who can speak in complete sentences using the right words for what he means. Is this too much to ask?
Yen dips on Bush slip of the tongue [BBC]
Mr Bush added a third item to this list, the need for "devaluation" of the yen. This remark immediately triggered a drop in the Japanese currency until Bush aides hastened to clear up the confusion.People who actually know what they're talking about generally correct themselves if they misspeak ("My mistake, I meant deflation, not devaluation"). Not our highly-approved-of leader, no; he leaves it for his aides to take care of hours later. How are we supposed to interpret that?
Replies: 3 comments so far
As I recollect President Clinton didn't even know the definition of the word "is".
This has nothing to do with President Bush's ability to continue protecting not only the USA but also a person who can work with all countries worldwide for the destruction of Terrorism through out the world.
Eventually you have little else to concern yourself if this is the only thing you can comment on , with what is going on in this country and the world.
Posted by Ethel Kendrick @ 02/20/2002 03:50PM est
* I find curious the widespread assumption that by pointing out something negative about one politician (Bush) I must somehow be implying that his opponent and/or predecessor (Clinton, Gore) were faultless in every way.
Yes, Clinton manipulated the language badly and laughably at times. Does that mean I should ignore what happens when President Bush's own mis-statements cause a country's markets to plunge? Because Clinton had faults, Bush has none?
What President Bush is 'doing for the world' is establishing a pattern in which no one can tell if he actually means what he says on a given day because he might just be speaking backwards-talk ('not over my dead body!') or using the wrong word ('devaluation'). Or he may even be intentionally obscuring what he wants ('this campaign finance reform bill would be an improvement! wait, we didn't quite mean that! or, well, maybe! don't ask us!').
Knowing that you can believe a President when they say something seems to me like an important thing to be concerned about. Aren't you? Why does Bush get a pass? Because Clinton was slippery?
I judge Bush's own actions on their own merits (crashing other countries' markets with crazy talk = BAD!); merely contrasting him to Clinton serves no purpose except to obscure Bush's very real faults.
Posted by Steve @ 02/20/2002 04:17PM est
* Bush is a semi-litterate talking chimp. He doesnt know what he is talking about; he can replay (poorly) what his aides (handlers) have programmed into him. He delivers his speeches in exactly the same manner in which they were laboriously taught to him, with lost arms flailing. Look at his face; he seems so self satisfied that he's saying things that must mean something to someone smarter, somewhere. The expression: a two year old that has successfully used a potty for the first time.
Posted by the only sane person talking @ 03/24/2002 12:03PM est
|Links, exploration and
photo by my wife
If you want to be e-mailed when there's new stuff here, say "add me."
Archives by week
2000 | 1999 | 1998
Search log since Aug. 2001:
Ye olde Amazon wish list
How's my HTML?
How's my CSS?