TBD

TBD on Ning

As first reported on WMAL's Chris Plante Show Tuesday, the Commander-in-Chief joined a cast of 61 other noted lawmakers, politicians, news anchors and celebrities, including every living President, in reciting the Gettysburg Address, which President Abraham Lincoln delivered on November 19, 1863.

The dignitaries all delivered the address as Lincoln had written it, including the phrase, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom."

Since the president has everything scripted for him, and either relies on a teleprompter or written speeches, this must have been on purpose, and not an accident.

some things are just wrong, and trying to revise an important speech in the history of our nation to fit an ideological agenda is wrong!

http://www.wmal.com/common/page.php?pt=WATCH%3A+President+Obama+Lea...

Views: 42

Replies to This Discussion

 

It’s a curious omission, particularly because, according to eyewitnesses, Lincoln is said to have used the words “under God” when he delivered the address on November 19, 1963 — 150 years ago Tuesday.

There are five widely-accepted handwritten drafts of the Gettysburg Address: the Bliss Copy, the Nicolay Copy, the Hay Copy, the Everett Copy and the Bancroft Copy — each named for the people who first received them, according to Abraham Lincoln Online.

Three of those drafts — Bliss, Everett and Bancroft — include the words “under God” in the speech’s final sentence.

But the other two drafts — Nicolay and Hay — are thought to be the only two from which Lincoln would have read from that autumn day.

In his YouTube video, Obama reads the Nicolay Copy.

This excellent article addresses that issue as well as much more important issues.

The celebration of the 150th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address offers an opportunity not simply to memorialize an extraordinary speech; it provides a model and a mirror for writing and speechmaking today.

"It's only words": This phrase captures what many feel about writing today. After all, our casual, rapid-fire communiques are tossed off at the push of a "send" button.

Within days of the battle of Gettysburg, plans were put in place to establish and dedicate the first national military cemetery. Gettysburg, Pa., civic leader David Wills invited Edward Everett, former president of Harvard University and the nation's leading orator, to offer the main address. Later, Wills invited Lincoln to offer "a few appropriate remarks." Definitely second fiddle.

In February 1861, as Lincoln delivered speeches during his inaugural train trip from Springfield, Ill., to Washington, Everett — reading newspaper reports — confided to his diary, "These speeches thus far have been of the most ordinary kind, destitute of everything, not merely of felicity and grace, but of common pertinence."

To their mutual surprise, Lincoln and Everett had an unexpected appointment with history at Gettysburg.

The story of the composition of the address was hijacked more than a century ago by a sentimental novelist who spun her tale that Lincoln wrote his speech on the back of an envelope on the train to Gettysburg.

No. We don't know for certain when he wrote the speech, but we do know Lincoln continued to edit his address in the upstairs bedroom in Wills' home, where he stayed the night before the dedication ceremony. He understood there is no such thing as good writing; there is only good rewriting.

On Nov. 19, 1863, Everett stepped forward and began to speak. He went on and on — for two hours and eight minutes. The crowd grew restless.

Lincoln rose, adjusted his spectacles, and began: "Four score and seven years ago." The first two words rhyme, setting in motion a symphony of sounds. The biblical ring of his opening was rooted in lines from Psalm 90. Lincoln never mentioned the Bible, but the whole of his speech was suffused with both biblical content and cadence.

He first placed the dedication of the battlefield in the larger context of American history. In appealing to "our fathers," Lincoln invoked a common heritage. The trajectory of that sentence underscored the American ideal that "all men are created equal." Lincoln at Gettysburg asserted that the meaning of the Civil War was about both liberty and union.

After the long introductory line, with quick strokes Lincoln recapitulated that meaning of the war. Unlike Everett, he spent none of his words on the details of the battle. His purpose was rather to transfigure the Pennsylvania cemetery dedication, to address its larger meaning. He mentioned the battlefield briefly, but he used the word "nation" five times. The Civil War became for Lincoln a "testing" of whether the American experiment could "endure."

When Lincoln declared, "But, in a larger sense," he signaled he was expanding the parameters of his address. But before he lifted his audience's eyes from the battlefield, Lincoln told them what they could not do: "We cannot dedicate; we cannot consecrate; we cannot hallow."

Lincoln's use of the negative was a pivot point, emphasizing by contrast what each person in the audience could do.

In his final three sentences Lincoln pointed away from words to deeds. He contrasted "what we say here" with "what they did here."

In this closing paragraph, he continued his use of repetition: "To be dedicated; to be here dedicated." And: "We take increased devotion"; "the last full measure of devotion."

Lincoln, who always chose his words carefully, here selected words that conjured up the call to religious commitment he heard regularly in the preaching at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington.

At this point in his delivery, Lincoln made the only addition to the text he had written. He interjected "under God." Unlike words added extemporaneously in earlier speeches, which he often edited out before he allowed a speech to be published, Lincoln included "under God" in subsequent copies of the address.

Those words pointed toward the next phrase, "a new birth of freedom," with its layered political and religious meanings. Politically speaking, at Gettysburg he was no longer defending an old Union but proclaiming a new one.

Lincoln, who had spoken for less than three minutes, concluded: "And that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth."

Everett delivered this review the next day: "I should be glad, if I could flatter myself, that I came as near to the central idea of the occasion in two hours as you did in two minutes."

So what should writers and speechmakers see in the mirror 150 years later?

Readers of the essay question in the SAT exam lamented recently that as today's high school students struggle to write comprehensible English, they try to impress by resorting to big words.

Let Lincoln be their guide. He chose his words carefully. In his 272 words, 204 were sturdy one syllable words, the kind he so appreciated in the Bible and in Shakespeare.

On the first anniversary of 9/11, as organizers in New York sought a politician or a poet who could give voice to their deepest feelings, in the end the audience recited the Gettysburg Address. Lincoln's careful choices speak across time.

As you read the Gettysburg Address today, read it slowly, for he spoke it slowly. Take time to appreciate the power of words. Words fiercely mattered to Abraham Lincoln. They ought to matter to us.

Ronald C. White Jr., a fellow at the Huntington Library and a visiting professor of history at UCLA, is the author of "A. Lincoln: A Biography."

There are more words in the Address than "under God".   "all men are created equal" for instance.

It's a shame that the alleged party of God subordinates Democrats, immigrants and blacks as inferior, even a President.

Isn't it obvious this party has no concept of what Jesus preached, or Lincoln preached?

Why does this omission bother tea party people so much base?

Bastards....

This was speech giving by the president of a new national party, brought out of the collapse of the Whigs of which Lincoln was a congress representative for one-term, having voiced his opposition to the War of Mexican Cession  of 1848.  

He and the new party, The Republicans, were an amalgamation of a number of movements, different from the Democrats of their day.  To say, tea-party like won't necessarily be off base as it was a populist movement that have many issues with the current Democrats including; free-soil, abolition and federal prerogatives as compared to states' rights.  

Lincoln only won because of those that opposed him were split into north and south Democrats and a pro-Union factions.  As such, being a new party and a minority president, Lincoln had a clean slate as to what he was going to do to deal with situation that he faced and he had hoped for calm and sense working together to keep the Union, which of course, didn't happen, and not the first time, hope and change hadn't worked out.

In the speech at Gettysburg, Lincoln was reflecting on his experience and his beliefs as he had started his presidency and which expressed that the ...new birth of freedom... would place the country back on the track he had envisioned and if he didn't express it, did intend it to be ...Under God...

The history books (at least not the ones printed in Texas :0) write that a Whig could not win a Presidential Election, only Democrats could win...sort of like today. So the Whigs renamed themselves the Republican Party in ~1860 so we wouldn't have to vote for the "Whig."

In the throes of death, Republicans may experience an intermediate stage of irrelevance on their slide to extinction as a consequence of inner-party splits as extremists pull ever harder to the right. The rise and fall of the short-lived Bull Moose Party might be informative as an historic comparison. During the presidential election of 1912, Theodore Roosevelt formed the new party (formally called the Progressive Party) after losing the nomination to William Howard Taft. The new party, named popularly from Roosevelt's assertion that he was "as strong as a bull moose," won 27 percent of the vote compared to Taft's 23 percent during the election. The resulting split allowed Wilson to win with 42 percent of the vote. The Bull Moose Party was on scene only briefly, and is little remembered today, but had a significant impact on American politics.

 What we should notice, it's always a Whig Republican.  When are we going to get it?

We have had a two party system since the founding of the republic, centered around two sets of beliefs and personalities, Jefferson and Hamilton, which followed the usual spit of left and right, liberal and conservative which followed the same split in the old home country, Great Britain.  

Neither the Republican-Democrats or the Federalists represented anything new, what they did do was represent belief systems held by many as old as democracy itself, back to Athens as far as recorded history goes.  And no, democracy was not the system of choice at that time and not so until recently as far as any human history goes.  Which again was one of the points in Lincoln's Gettysburg address...that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth... good words then, good words now, so help us god...

Yep, that's a far cry from government of the corporate rich, by republican voter suppression and gerrymandering, for themselves only.

RSS

Badge

Loading…

© 2025   Created by Aggie.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service