Remember how before the war thread after thread was devoted to the discussion of President George W. Bush’s problems with grammar? You couldn’t buy a magazine, use the Internet or watch television without coming across a reference to his sometimes hilarious sentence constructions. Whether he was dyslexic or not, that was the question. Well, it would seem not, wouldn’t it? He seems to have undergone a radical improvement. What is this due to? The shock of the war? A new lipsynching program by Microsoft? I haven’t heard a Bush blunder or reference to one for quite a while. Am I right to suppose he has been Pygmalioned in some way?
I’m not sure if the fact that the title should say “speak properly” is a joke or just amusingly ironic. 
Whenever I see Dopefest pictures I wonder exactly the same thing about Dopers’ fashion sense. Wipe down rags never went away, right?
You mean you missed his repeated mangling of “nuclear” (among other words) last week?
rjung: Yes, I must have. Would you agree, at least, that Mr Bush is making fewer grammatical errors these days? I don’t mind being told I’m wrong at all but it does seem that way to me.
The Dope clothes comment is the “Can’t Pay” me speaking, by the way. So much retaliation so little time. Not one pen friend in two years, you know. Well, sort of. But not one Xmas Card. Nothing.
During the past two months, we’ve mostly just seen Bush reading off speeches and statements that were prepared ahead of time. We haven’t seen him speaking in conversation mode very often. Consequently, he has fewer opportunities to make mistakes.
That makes sense, I suppose, but I thought dyslexics found reading difficult at the best of times. Whether the President really has that disorder is still open to question though, isn’t it?
I’ve noticed that most of the world has been saying that KAB-ul is the capital of Afganistan, while as of yesterday the president was still consistantly saying ka-BUL.
Regarding the pronunciation of “Kabul”, what’s up with that? Up until a few days ago, it was always ka-BUL. Now, it’s like all the news anchors had a secret meeting yesterday, and someone, probably Peter Jennings, stands up and whispers, “Okay, from now on we’re gonna call it KA-bul. Is everybody in?”
George Bush’s image is one of acute vulnerability. I could believe his problem with words stems from stress and extreme nervousness rather than dyslexia any day of the week. I look at his face and all the stuff I’ve ever heard about his links to evil oil barons and his anti-ecological and pro-life stances seems to become less important than deciding just how badly he needs his cuddly toy.
I think a lot of stuff slides by because the circumstances are so serious. It’s pretty hard to listen to this speech, and then say “Haw haw haw. Can you believe he said Women of Cover? Whatta Doofus!”
Put me in for finding the “women of cover” phrase an unexpected jewel.
Both Bushes have always had some sort of ongoing battle with the spoken English language (Remember Pop Bush’s syntax-from-outer-space?). But I think have noticed something about “Dubs” Bush’s public speaking lately:
(1) In formal, scripted settings, where the written speeches are more direct, more out to “connect” emotionally with the people (“let’s roll”), and even less wonky than before.
(2) Also, he hasn’t had to do speeches on topics that bore or baffle the people and perhaps himself (Carbon Emissions, anyone?) since 9/11
(3) In more unstructured instances - i.e. atop the pile of rubble with the megaphone – he does not seek to go on and on for the record, but rather just say something to those who are there.
(4) In all cases, it’s like, “live your lives, go out on the town”, and “you’re with us or with the terrorists,” not a 1-hour dissertation on supply and demand in the service economy or a monograph on multilateral diplomacy.
And what am I noticing?
He is not trying to impress me. In which “me” stands for those of us who would normally tear out our hair over our CinC being quoted spouting malapropisms.
I share the hypothesis that a lot of the awkwardness may have been related to he (and his minders) being constantly stressed out over how he’d come across, would he sound “presidential”, whether the speech would contain stuff that was not his strong suit and if he’d be making mistakes… and thus he’d psych himself to MAKE mistakes and compound upon them. (IOW trying too hard to prove he IS smart, TOO.)
NOW he and his minders and ourselves have something REALLY to be stressed about, something REALLY “life-or-death” that has his full attention. So now he is not caring about whether he should use a more impressive word and would it be “subliminal” or “subliminable”, it just goes through. And WE realize that this is right and good and that maybe we care less about how he says it that about WHAT he says.
jrd
As for “nucular”, I just want some folks from the US South to explain to me where the heck do they find that “u” between the “c” and the “l”. Do Classics scholars read “Culytemunestura”, or Shakesperean actors play “Antony and Culopatura”???
Oddly, I keep thinking, “Get this kid out of here and let’s get a real President on the job.”
In a time of crisis, spooked-deer-staring-at-headlights is not the way to go.
JRDelirious
The South? I hear it pronounced that way all over the place. Blame Eisenhower.
Maybe you and notcynical would like to check out this thread? It pretty much answers your query on the Kah-BUL/KAH-bul thing.
JRDelirious: Thank you so much for your informative reply.
American Studies students would be jealous.
I have also been one of those that has hung on GWB’s every word to hear a slip of the tongue.
The first time I heard him speak informally was in the oval office on 9/11, when he got a little teary. I was finally comfortable listening to him speak and I think he’s gotten better over time.
I have noticed, however, that when he is speaking informally, he’s what I call a pause-talker (slightly Seinfeld inspired description). He will pause in mid-sentence to grasp onto what he’s trying to say. But I can’t blame him for that because I also do that. I blame it on the pot smoking in my younger days. I wonder if he does, as well. 
My theory is (just a theory, this is IMHO ) that he is speaking in small, easy to translate words so that Osama Bin Ladin will get the message.
Or, perhaps he hasn’t been trying to impress the Congress with his grasp of difficult agendas and is speaking more directly rather than from a speech writer’s script.