Because victory for Senator Kerry would make the White House a nucular-free zone.
This is the elocution election
Because victory for Senator Kerry would make the White House a nucular-free zone.
Because victory for Senator Kerry would make the White House a nucular-free zone.
Because victory for Senator Kerry would make the White House a nucular-free zone.
Comments
6 responses
What irks me even more is when people tell me that they are voting for one person just to put a vote against the other candidate.
Granted, there’s probably no one out there that likes EVERYTHING about 1 candidate; however, if you are going to vote for someone, you should feel that candidate would do a good job as President of the United States.
I can see this thought process, to an extent…but it still irks me. It irks me a lot more than the passionate person on the other side of the fence than me.
I’ve been surprised that nobody has brought up a previous president who struggled with the word nuclear. Jimmy Carter called himself both a nukear and a nucular engineer while campaigning and in the White House. I was an engineering student at the time…it used to irk all of us, that he:
– was using his attendance/graduation from the Navy’s nuclear school (submarine training) as something that conferred an engineering degree–it did and does not, and
– didn’t know how to (or didn’t care enough to) pronounce his supposed degree properly.
But, Carter’s a genius and Bush is a dunce, or so the story goes.
Two good points, and thank you both for making them. Sheilah, I’ve seen a few candidates who are so bad that I would vote for the other person no matter what, but only a few. You wrote, “If you are going to vote for someone, you should feel that candidate would do a good job as President of the United States.” True enough, but suppose (with no reference to this year’s candidates intended) you felt that neither candidate would be a particularly good president — is it better to vote for the one who would be not as bad as the other one, or to abstain from voting altogether?
Gordie, I fall prey, as I imagine others do, to the fault of evaluating someone’s intelligence by his or her pronunciation, even when other evidence suggests that the person is brighter than his or her diction indicates. When I do it, it’s an error that affects me and sometimes the other person (not often, because I’m unimportant in the grand scheme). It’s a worse error when our government does it; I’ve had the theory for some time that our nation chooses its friends overseas by their ability to speak English, not by whether they like us.
Interesting theory on the English. One could analyze it though cultural similarities, how well leaders can communicate with each other, the arrogance we can present by expecting others to speak our language (and that occasionally we perceive when others can speak English but choose not to), etc. Have to chew on that thought for awhile.
I see what you are saying, by all means. However, I was looking at it from the point of view where some one truly detests a candidate, yet is voting for them anyway. They could always write someone in.
Can you direct me to a source of elocution lessons with a business angle? I am in Tucson, AZ and we need to arrange a group training for about 30 people.
Thank you.