by Pieter J. Friedrich
4/14/04
I've criticized President Bush's foreign policy, I've criticized his domestic policy, and heck, pro-lifer that I am I've even criticized his pro-life strategies. The one thing I've generally avoided is criticism of Bush's speech patterns. He's never come across as the smoothest public speaker, but I figured there wasn't much point in criticizing his oratory skills.
However, after watching President Bush's particularly atrocious butchering of the English language in his April 13th, 2004 press conference I must make some comment. President Bush spent the evening mangling sentences, making plural nouns which should have been singular and making singular nouns which should have been plural, and generally personifying (through his grammatical blunders) Mark Twain's claim that "It is better to be silent and thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."
Christian author Dave Black pointed out that, "The very first statement in [the President's] prepared remarks contained this grammatical monstrosity: 'This has been tough weeks in that country.'" Perhaps the President meant to say, "The past few weeks in Iraq have been tough ones."
When asked if he thought decreasing American support for the war in Iraq would ultimately cost him his job the President answered: "One of my hardest parts of my job is to console the family members who have lost their life." Perhaps the President meant to say, "One of the hardest parts of my job is to console the family members who have lost their loved ones."
In his 17-minute opening statement, the President said, "This weekend, at a Fort Hood hospital, I presented a Purple Heart to some of our wounded; had the honor of thanking them on behalf of all Americans." Unless the soldiers at Ford Hood intended to chop up the Purple Heart and share the pieces then I think Bush meant to say, "This weekend, at a Fort Hood hospital, I presented Purple Hearts to some of our wounded and had the honor of thanking them on behalf of all Americans."
Also in his opening (and written and thus hard to mess up) statement, the President said, "Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of State Rumsfeld, etc." I've met many people who don't know that Powell is the Secretary of State and Rumsfeld the Secretary of Defense but I'd have thought by now and after appointing them himself the President would have figured out which was which. (I understand the above isn't a grammatical error, but it's so glaring that I had to include it.)
Again, in his opening written statement, the President said, "The terrorist who takes hostages, or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad is serving the same ideology of murder that kills innocent people on trains in Madrid, and murders children on buses in Jerusalem, and blows up a nightclub in Bali, and cuts the throat of a young reporter for being a Jew." Perhaps the President meant to say, "The terrorist who takes hostages or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad serves ['is serving' is passive voice] the same ideology of death that motivates men to kill innocent people on trains in Madrid, murder children on buses in Jerusalem, blow up a nightclub in Bali, and cut the throat of a young reporter simply because he's Jewish." (Admittedly, the above sentence was far less grammatically ugly than many of the things Bush said last night, but I included it because the awkward phrasing, the use of passive voice, and the notion that an ideology kills people rather than motivating people to kill people all irked me.)
In answer to a challenging question suggesting the war was based on false premises, the President said, "[Saddam Hussein] was a threat because he funded suiciders." Perhaps the President meant to say, "[Saddam Hussein] was a threat because he funded suicide bombers." (Unless Bush intended to play Shakespeare by coining a new word then I'm afraid "suicider" is not a word to be found in the English language.)
Other miscellaneous grammatical errors included the following:
"There are some things I wish we'd have done..." He should have said, "...we had done." Bush's original statement (minus the contraction) reads: "...we had have done."
"...there's mass graves." He should have said, "...there are mass graves." Bush's original statement (minus the contraction) reads: "...there is mass graves."
"...we've been on war ever since." Bush seems to have a lot of trouble with confusing prepositions. He should have said, "...at war..."
"...we'll find out the truth on the weapons." Again, Bush confuses his prepositions. He should have said, "...about the weapons."
"We have an obligation to lead the fight on AIDS, on Africa." He should have said, "...the fight on AIDS in Africa."
"We're providing food for the North Korea people who starve." He should have said, "...for the starving North Koreans." The proper term for people who live in North Korea is "North Koreans" just as the proper term for people who live in China is "Chinese" and not "China people."
A public speaker is expected to stammer a bit and to make a handful of mistakes (grammatical and otherwise) when forced to speak off-the-cuff, and even the most experienced of speakers will at times be forced to correct himself. What's so shocking about Bush's speech, however, is not just the huge number of grammatical errors but the fact that he did not correct a single one of the above listed gaffs. One wonders if Bush was even aware of any of his verbal slip-ups.
Disclaimer: I hold President Bush in all due respect, and do not intend this article to mock him. However, I believe the president, as leader of the largest English-speaking nation in the world, should be held to a higher standard than the average American in all things, English grammar included. It would be wise for President Bush to retain the services of a speech coach.
