I was only trying religion of Barack Obama's inaugural address in relation to those of Bush . Everywhere it is said that there is much less differences with Bush's speech on assuming his second term . And the much-lauded change? Of course there is but a level of attitude, mood, speech that itself:
On The Line blog sarcastically includes some of the big "differences" between speech and Busheano Obamitas. I quote a part that I missed in my previous post on Obama's religion (which was what really struck to those attending the ceremony):
First we have the difference between Bush's religiosity, which verges on Christian fundamentalism, and Obama, who has a greater sensitivity to the different beliefs:Another thing that was cause for applause crested end point was the assumption that Obama would put the "revolution (neo) conservative" Ronald Reagan initiated . Neither Obama is so innovative about Reagan was not so neo-con as many imagine:
That edifice of character is built in Families, Supported by Communities with standards, and Sustained In Our national life by the Truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the VARIED faiths of Our people. George W.
BushFor we know That patchwork Our heritage is a strength, not a Weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. Barack H.
Obama
Obama:
What the Cynics fail to Understand Is That the ground has shifted beneath Them - That the arguments That stale Political have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control — and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart — not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
Reagan (en el discurso inaugural de su primer mandato ):
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that Government by an elite group is superior to Government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one is capable of Among Us Governing Himself, Then Who Among Us has the Capacity to Govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of Government, Must bear the burden. The solutions we seek Must Be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a high price.
These two approaches (one positive and one negative, if you will) the same objective equal. What are "revolutions" we are talking about then? In no particularly safe from the original American Revolution .
And speaking of Reagan: did you know that your inaugural speech was much more viewers than Obama ?
Tags: Barack Obama George Bush Reagan inaugural speech change United States
0 comments:
Post a Comment