Feeds:
Inlägg
Kommentarer

Posts Tagged ‘John T. Bennet’

SPRÅK | Politiker komplicerar sitt sätt att uttrycka sig av olika anledningar. En som inte alltid är lätt att förstå vad han menar är Barack Obama.

Barack Obama

Ibland handlar det om att man har något att dölja. Vid andra tillfällen vill man kanske helt enkelt undvika att vara tydlig.

Eller så vet vad man inte vad man tycker men känner att ändå måste säga något.

President Obama har en förmåga att uttrycka sig på ett sätt som får många att undra vad han egentligen menar. Många gånger låter det direkt kryptiskt.

John T. Bennet har skrivit nätartikeln “Deciphering Obama: The President’s Complicating Syntax”:

The 44th president has taken plenty of heat over his rhetorical gyrations on both sides of the very “red line” he set last year on Syria’s bloody civil war. And political pundits and those with a stake in overturning the much-maligned sequestration cuts are still scratching their heads over the the newest Obama turn-of-phrase: “permission structures.”

The problem for Obama — and by extension, stakeholders in the quest for a “grand bargain” fiscal deal that would undo the defense and domestic sequestration cuts (and by further extension, the entire country) — is his syntax has become complicated. And, as a result, it is complicating the work of getting things done, maintaining a sense of presidential authority in Washington and transmitting consistent leadership on the world stage.

For another project, I have spent the last five months closely examining the words of Candidate Obama and then President Obama. What I found was a coarsening over time of Obama’s syntax. Candidate Obama was hailed as one of the great orator’s in U.S. political history.

My examination of Obama’s rhetoric — which focused on drone strikes, covert raids and the fight against al-Qaida — reveals the longer Obama is inside the infamously insular “presidential bubble,” the more his rhetoric is becoming a double-edged sword.

For instance, since he emerged on the national — and world — stage in the mid-2000s, Obama’s style is to use bold descriptors. “Red line” is a perfect example.

But, the longer he is president, the more he wraps these bold action phrases in murky qualifiers.

Ett annat exempel är omröstningen i kongressen om striktare vapenkontroller.

Obamas sätt att uttrycka sig fick Paul M. Barrett i Bloomberg Businessweek att undra om han ens själv trodde på ett positivt utfall.

While liberal activists decried the legislative flop, the outcome should not have shocked anyone who listened to Democratic leaders’ tentative tone since the December massacre in Newtown, Conn. In the crescendo of his Feb. 12 State of the Union address, Obama said of gun-violence victims, “They deserve a vote.” Not that they deserve swift passage of curbs on assault weapons, large-capacity ammunition magazines, and so on. They deserve, the president said, a vote.

[…]

Two factors inhibited influential Democrats from engaging in a real brawl on guns: First, they fear losing their tenuous 55-45 hold on the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections. Second, there’s a palpable sense in Washington that Obama’s other major social-issue priority, immigration reform, has a better chance than gun control in the House of Representatives. Speaker John Boehner, contending with the rambunctious Tea Party wing of his party, had refused to commit to allowing a House floor vote on firearm limits. In the end, Democrats calculated that, even after Newtown, expanding immigration is a better bet than restricting guns.

Det är alltid lätt att vara visionär i en valrörelse. När man sedan skall styra räcker det inte alltid bara med fina ord.

Det är då lätt att politiker väljer att gömmer sig bakom fina fraser för att åtminstone låta som om man vet vad man gör och vart man är på väg.

Eller så uttalar man sig kryptiskt för att alla skall kunna tolka in vad man önskar höra.

Bild: AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais.

Read Full Post »