Whoever wrote the speech for him was trying to romanticize that period of American history to the point where it could draw subtle analogies to present situations in a few places, one of which the US has (rightfully, IMO) drawn ire of late.
I’m not sure it worked as well as it could have, but it’s not like Dubya’s talents lay in speechwriting.
I can’t stand Bush, but I don’t see a thing wrong with the speech. And, Jesus, it’s not like he wrote it!
He’s against it. What more do you people want? Now, let’s see where he stands on Free Silver.
Well, I for one agree with the President. It’s a darn good thing that America had slavery, or else our national conscience would have never been awakened. Here’s to you, slaves!
Yup. That’s about it.
The OP is right in that the comment doesn’t make much sense. Is it pit worthy? I don’t think so.
Actually, it is an excellent speech; maybe he ought to give it again when he gets home! Though the particular passage that bothered me still makes no sense to me, even in its full context.
And Coldfire, I stand corrected. I’d thought that Great Britain was the last of the European powers to make slavery illegal, but I’m obviously wrong on that score.
I think this thread’s pretty much done; Coldie (or the next mod to stop by), feel free to close this one up.
…and Brazil still had legal slavery until the 1890’s. It was the last place in the Americas with legal slaves. The last living person born as a legal slave in the New World died about ten years ago.
As someone mentioned earlier, there is still a great deal of slavery in the Sudan but, though widely practiced, I don’t think that it’s strictly legal. There was a long history of that disgusting practice in Africa long before the Europeans ever showed up and it still exists today. There are still many slaves, maybe better described as indentured servents, in South East Asia working in factories. There are a large number of sex slaves in Eastern Europe. Even in the US, slaves are smuggled in to work as cheap labor. Recently a large group of Thai women were discovered working in an illegal textile factory.
When I first Bush’s comments in the paper this morning I too was confused as to what he meant. I thought about it a bit and I think it was this: I think he meant that the US became wealthy on slave labor in the early years. This gave the young nation the resources necessary to free themselves from the British. In addition, African Americans were heroic fighters in the first wars that the US fought only to be rewarded with second class status. Something along those lines.
Haj
Well, there’s enough different interpretations of what Bush meant, even aside from my own, that it’s gotta be clear that he wasn’t particularly clear.
I agree that this was a mundane and pointless Pit thread, though.
What a bold political statment. To come out against slavery. What bravery Bravo W. I guess with Strom dead and gone, Jesse out of the senate and Trent out of his leadership position he felt safe that he would not burn too much political capital and his statements would not cause a rift in the republican party.
Oh come on. I’m no Bushie, far from it, but I wonder what you would have said if he went there and didn’t mention slavery at all?
Haj
Yeah it was a cheap shot, and pretty lame, but fuck Bush he’s an asshole.
Thread closed at the request of the OP.