Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Another Mystery Bushism:
I'm very pleased that the Bushisms column has finally started linking
to the original source for the alleged Bushism, so that readers can
determine for themselves whether the quote is accurate and in context.
Still, I can't figure out what the Bushisms author thinks is the
problem with [1]today's quote:
"In this job you've got a lot on your plate on a regular basis; you
don't have much time to sit around and wander, lonely, in the Oval
Office, kind of asking different portraits, 'How do you think my
standing will be?'" -- Washington, D.C., March 16, 2005
Is the supposed inarticulateness the mild mismatch between "sit
around" and "wander," because wandering requires standing, not
sitting? I take it that Bush was using "sit around" as partly
figurative -- when you're asked what you did Sunday, and you say "I
sat around the house," your behavior need not have been limited to
physical sitting -- and partly as one activity in a set of activities:
You can spend part of your time sitting around brooding and part
wandering lonely, talking to portraits. Is it that he should have said
"What do you think my standing will be?" instead of "How?"
Just a bit more context: Bush was asked a question about whether he
felt vindicated by recent events; he gave a serious answer, but
understandably felt that it would be better if leavened with some
impromptu humor. So he told a little off-the-cuff joke, which the
audience seemed to like (you can hear laughter, and I doubt that they
were laughing at the sit around vs. wander problem on the how vs.
what). Articulate, educated, intelligent readers of mine: Are all your
extemporaneous jokes marvels of perfect word choice? Friends of Slate
writers: Are all their extemporaneous jokes immaculately crafted?
Just what in Bush's quote is deserving of mockery?
References
1. http://slate.com/id/2115013/
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
