Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It wouldn't be important if it didn't reflect a pattern of behavior. It's not the first time he's omitted references to God, most notably when he's curiously omitted the "Creator" when referencing the Declaration of Independence.
For it to be part of "a pattern," it would have had to actually happen.
If it wasn't in the rough draft, and Mr Burns asked President Obama to read the rough draft, and President read the rough draft AS IT WAS WRITTEN, then President Obama didn't edit anything out.
President Obama didn't alter the words. He read what was written. The fact that some of you HATE him so much that you are unable to comprehend the simplest of facts is what is ridiculous.
What the hell are you talking about? Who the hell is Mr. Burns?
What the hell are you talking about? Who the hell is Mr. Burns?
Ken Burns... the documentarian who asked Obama to read the address for his film.
Lincoln wrote out 5 known copies of the address in his own hand. Two of them (both the ones he wrote out before giving the address) do not contain the words "under God." Only the three copies he made (for fundraising purposes) in 1864 contain the phrase.
There is no way of knowing whether or not he said them when he actually gave the address.
What the hell are you talking about? Who the hell is Mr. Burns?
Mr Burns is Ken Burns, the historian. Mr Burns was working on a production about the Gettysburg Address. As part of that project, he asked various people, celebrities, politicians, writers, etc, to read the Gettysburg Address while being filmed. As part of that project, Mr Burns asked President Obama to read the original draft of the Gettysburg Address as written by President Lincoln. The first two versions of the Gettysburg Address, did not include the words, "under God." Neither were they identical, as is the nature of drafts. President Lincoln went on to handwrite three other copies of the Gettysburg Address. There are five versions in the President's handwriting. None are identical to the other.
The draft that Mr Burns asked Mr Obama to read is the draft that many historians believe President Lincoln carried with him to the lectern to read from. It is likely that President Lincoln continued editing his speech as he spoke, something most great speakers do, because there is a relationship between the speaker and the audience, and that relationship requires adjustments.
Since we had no devices capable of recording President Lincoln, we have no "actual" version of his speech. We have five variants in his own handwriting, and several more variants from people who actually attended the speech. I think it's quite likely that he added the words, "under God" to his speech, as he spoke, because the words themselves suited the occasion, and because Lincoln was a wordsmith, the added syllables actually lend themselves to the rhythm of the speech.
However, Mr Burns did not ask President Obama to mimic President Lincoln, or to try to recite it the way President Lincoln did. Mr Burns asked President Obama to read President Lincoln's first draft of the speech. Which is what President Obama did, word for word, exactly as President Lincoln wrote it.
Mr Burns is Ken Burns, the historian. Mr Burns was working on a production about the Gettysburg Address. As part of that project, he asked various people, celebrities, politicians, writers, etc, to read the Gettysburg Address while being filmed. As part of that project, Mr Burns asked President Obama to read the original draft of the Gettysburg Address as written by President Lincoln. The first two versions of the Gettysburg Address, did not include the words, "under God." Neither were they identical, as is the nature of drafts. President Lincoln went on to handwrite three other copies of the Gettysburg Address. There are five versions in the President's handwriting. None are identical to the other.
The draft that Mr Burns asked Mr Obama to read is the draft that many historians believe President Lincoln carried with him to the lectern to read from. It is likely that President Lincoln continued editing his speech as he spoke, something most great speakers do, because there is a relationship between the speaker and the audience, and that relationship requires adjustments.
Since we had no devices capable of recording President Lincoln, we have no "actual" version of his speech. We have five variants in his own handwriting, and several more variants from people who actually attended the speech. I think it's quite likely that he added the words, "under God" to his speech, as he spoke, because the words themselves suited the occasion, and because Lincoln was a wordsmith, the added syllables actually lend themselves to the rhythm of the speech.
However, Mr Burns did not ask President Obama to mimic President Lincoln, or to try to recite it the way President Lincoln did. Mr Burns asked President Obama to read President Lincoln's first draft of the speech. Which is what President Obama did, word for word, exactly as President Lincoln wrote it.
It doesn't matter what was in the rough drafts. Lincoln thought it was important to include it, Barack Obama thought it was important to edit it out. His desire not to offend anyone is ridiculous and inaccurate. The words weren't his to alter.
That is absolutely false. He read the version of the address that he was GIVEN to read.
Period. End of story.
Righties should really stop trying to turn this into another Obama hate fest. It really only makes you appear silly and people are less likely to listen to your litany of complaints in the future.
With no emotion whatsoever, almost a monotone, Obama recites the Gettysburg Address ... and leaves out "under God." I have never heard such a poor, unemotional recitation in my entire life. Positively awful! And why did he leave out "under God?" Was this for "political correctness" in deference to Muslims? One has to wonder. After all, this is the man who likes to talk about all the wonderful contributions of Muslims in America (like, 9-11?)!
Conservatives need to stop being so scared of all Muslims. Not all Muslims are terrorists; in fact, most aren't. Most Muslim Americans just want to live in peace and be free to practice their religion as anyone else is free to practice theirs. Judging all Muslims on the basis of what two dozen or so of them did one day is rather stupid. It makes about as much sense as imprisoning all Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. And recognizing that most Muslims should be treated with respect doesn't mean that we can't be tough and vigilant against those who are a real threat.
If conservatives could evolve some intellect that allows them to distinguish shades of gray rather than see everything in the black-white perspective of a grade schooler, they might be taken more seriously.
You must be related to that good ole Dem boy, George Wallace.
No. I read a history book
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
