State of the Union

Gary Schmitt at AEI:

[P]residents from both parties now view the broader public more than Congress as their addressee. Instead of engaging in dialogue with the other branch of government, presidents hope to mobilize public opinion in their speech, generating poll numbers that, they believe, might pressure members to pass the various measures they are putting forward. In other words, instead of talking to Congress, they are talking over their heads as often as not.

It’s no surprise, then, that the members themselves understand their role, in turn, to be cheerleaders or frowning faces depending on their side of the aisle. The function of the president’s co-partisans is to reinforce the view that the president has the popular wind at this back. The last thing on their minds is how some proposal might be put through the deliberative and sausage-making process of committee hearings and floor debate.

Instead of the State of the Union address being a singular constitutional moment, whose formal audience is the Congress, we get a follow-on act that is meant to dismiss to some degree or another almost instantaneously whatever the duly elected chief executive has to say. There is no due deference to the fact that one person has been selected as president and he or she is not just the head of a party but, in this instance, is doing his or her constitutional duty. The fact is, the State of the Union Address is in a sorry state.

Biden: Unlike two trillion dollar tax cut passed in the previous administration that benefited the top 1% of Americans, the American Rescue Plan
Republicans: Boo
Schumer: *waits to clap*
Biden: The American Rescue plan helped working people
Schumer: *claps* pic.twitter.com/gXxcvTsR8K

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 2, 2022

How Presidents Mention Their Predecessors

Amnon Cavari, Benjamin Yoel, Hannah Lowenkamp have an article at American Politics Research titled "In the Name of the President."  The abstract:

Presidents often make references to their predecessors in their oral remarks—a rhetorical tool that can advance support for their policies, define their presidency, and achieve political gains. And yet, despite the frequency that this rhetorical tool is used and its possible impact, references to former presidents have so far defied a systematic empirical research. To fill in this void in the literature, we examine the frequency of references to presidents, the identity of referenced presidents, and the policy context of each reference in all oral references made by presidents Reagan through Trump. We demonstrate that mentioning former presidents is a political tool that presidents use routinely in their public speeches. We find that presidents use this tool strategically—controlling the timing and identity of references and in connection to their policy appeals.

Reagan mentioned JFK more than any other president, even Lincoln.

 

References and Allusions in MLK's "I Have a Dream"

 The "I Have a Dream" speech contains many references and allusions to key ideas, sites, and documents of American civic culture.  The text below contains relevant links in red.

A major theme of our textbook is the relevance of religion in American public life.  Many passages in the speech refer or allude to Bible verses, spiritual songs, sermons, and other aspects of religion. These links are in blue.

------------------------------------------------

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities.

We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating for whites only. 

We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.
Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,
From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

Declining Discourse

Pew reports that the public is unhappy with the level of deliberation and discourse:

The public renders a harsh judgment on the state of political discourse in this country. And for many Americans, their own conversations about politics have become stressful experiences that they prefer to avoid.

Large majorities say the tone and nature of political debate in the United States has become more negative in recent years – as well as less respectful, less fact-based and less substantive.

Meanwhile, people’s everyday conversations about politics and other sensitive topics are often tense and difficult. Half say talking about politics with people they disagree with politically is “stressful and frustrating.”

When speaking with people they do not know well, more say they would be very comfortable talking about the weather and sports – and even religion – than politics. And it is people who are most comfortable with interpersonal conflict, including arguing with other people, who also are most likely to talk about politics frequently and to be politically engaged.

... 

Pew Research Center’s wide-ranging survey of attitudes about political speech and discourse in the U.S. was conducted April 29-May 13 among 10,170 adults. Among the other major findings:

Broad agreement on the dangers of “heated or aggressive” rhetoric by political leaders. A substantial majority (78%) says “heated or aggressive” language directed by elected officials against certain people or groups makes violence against them more likely. This view is more widely shared among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents than Republican and Republican leaners.

Words, Public Opinion, and Higher Education

At Gallup, Brandon Busteed and Frank Newport report:

Different words used to describe higher education evoke different confidence ratings among U.S. adults. Americans are considerably more likely to say they have a great deal of confidence in "higher education" than in "colleges and universities." Public confidence in "community colleges" and "postsecondary education" falls between these other two terms.
...
The term colleges and universities in a comparative sense evokes more negative reactions than the broader terms higher education or postsecondary education. Thirty-six percent of Americans have a great deal of confidence in higher education, compared with 29% who have a great deal of confidence in postsecondary education and 23% who have a great deal of confidence in colleges and universities. More broadly, these differences persist, but are slightly reduced, when adding in the group of Americans who say they have quite a lot of confidence -- 55% have either a great deal of or quite a lot of confidence in higher education, compared with 45% in colleges and universities.

Gallup also finds a partisan and ideological divide:

Confidence in Four Ways of Describing Postsecondary Education, by Partisanship and Ideology

% Great deal of confidence

	Higher education	Community colleges	Postsecondary education	Colleges and universities
	%	%	%	%
Party ID
Republicans	26	28	25	12
Independents	33	27	28	22
Democrats	50	34	33	37
Ideology
Conservatives	25	28	26	15
Moderates	40	31	29	26
Liberals	45	30	35	28
GALLUP, JAN. 8-28, 2018

State of the Union: Reading Level

From the School of Information at UC Berkeley:

Reading Level of State of the Union Addresses

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level readability test1, datascience@berkeley collected the grade level of each presidents’ first State of the Union address.

Reading Level of State of the Union Addresses

President	Party	Year	Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level
Donald J. Trump	Republican	2018	8.1
Barack Obama	Democrat	2010	8.7
George W. Bush	Republican	2002	9.8
Bill Clinton	Democrat	1994	8.9
George Bush Sr.	Republican	1990	9.0
Ronald Reagan	Republican	1982	11.1
James Carter, Jr.	Democrat	1978	9.8
Gerald Ford	Republican	1975	10.9
Richard Nixon	Republican	1970	10.8
Lyndon B. Johnson	Democrat	1964	11.4
John F. Kennedy	Democrat	1961	12.8
Dwight D. Eisenhower	Republican	1953	12.4
Harry S. Truman	Democrat	1946	12.7
Franklin D. Roosevelt	Democrat	1934	15.5
Herbert Hoover	Republican	1929	14.5
Calvin Coolidge	Republican	1923	10.9
Warren Harding	Republican	1921	14.7
Woodrow Wilson	Democrat	1913	15.6

Transcripts: https://presidency.ucsb.edu/sou.php

1The Flesch-Kincaid readability tests are designed to indicate how difficult a passage in English is to understand.↑

Presidential Vocabulary

Bill Frischling writes at Factbl.og that Trump uses a less developed vocabulary than other presidents.

California and States' Rights

Liberals are embracing states' rights,  a term that -- until very recently -- they denounced as a racist dog whistle.

Tim Arango at NYT:

Just as Californians were enjoying their first days of legal pot smoking, the Trump administration moved to enforce federal laws against the drug. On the same day, the federal government said it would expand offshore oil drilling, which California’s Senate leader called an assault on “our pristine coastline.”

When President Trump signed a law that would raise the tax bills of many Californians by restricting deductions, lawmakers in this state proposed a creative end-around — essentially making state taxes charitable contributions, and fully deductible. And California’s refusal to help federal agents deport undocumented immigrants prompted one administration official to suggest that state politicians should be arrested.

The clash between California and Mr. Trump and his supporters — between one America and another — began the morning after he won the presidency, when Kevin de León, the State Senate leader, and his counterpart in the Assembly, Anthony Rendon, said they “woke up feeling like strangers in a foreign land.”

Since then the fight has metastasized into what could be the greatest contest over values between a White House and a state since the 1950s and 1960s, when the federal government moved to end segregation and expand civil rights.

Back then, of course, the ideologies and values at issue were reversed, as conservative Southerners, under the banner of states’ rights, fought violently to uphold white supremacy. In these times it is liberal California making the case for states’ rights, traditionally a Republican position.

Typos, Continued

Another day, another step backward for education. On his Facebook page, Trump misspelled miners.

a 

Typos

The Trump administration is incompetent in ways both large and small.

*Handel pic.twitter.com/CNDGUcTfIQ

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) June 19, 2017

At Pacific Standard, Seth Masket recalls his work in the White House Office of Correspondence, which once subjected outgoing mail to several layers of review.  The Trump administration is ... different.

Some examples of these typos can be found here. I'm less interested in those resulting from Trump's tweets and other less formal communications than I am in those appearing in official correspondence and press statements. These include, but are not limited to:

• A press release about the Middle East that sought to promote "the possibility of lasting peach."
• A White House media list of global terror attacks that contained such words as "Attaker," "San Bernadino" and "Denmakr."
• British Prime Minister Theresa May's name misspelled as "Teresa May," which happens to be the name of a porn star.
• This message to schools receiving the President's Education Award, in which "success" was spelled "succuess." (This error was apparently caught and fixed in subsequent iterations.)

Frederick Douglass's Speech

Trump apparently thought that Frederick Douglass is still alive.  He is not, but his words are.  On Memorial Day, it is worth remembering his address at Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia, on Decoration Day, May 30, 1871.

The essence and significance of our devotions here to-day are not to be found in the fact that the men whose remains fill these graves were brave in battle. If we met simply to show our sense of bravery, we should find enough on both sides to kindle admiration. In the raging storm of fire and blood, in the fierce torrent of shot and shell, of sword and bayonet, whether on foot or on horse, unflinching courage marked the rebel not less than the loyal soldier.

But we are not here to applaud manly courage, save as it has been displayed in a noble cause. We must never forget that victory to the rebellion meant death to the republic. We must never forget that the loyal soldiers who rest beneath this sod flung themselves between the nation and the nation's destroyers. If today we have a country not boiling in an agony of blood, like France, if now we have a united country, no longer cursed by the hell-black system of human bondage, if the American name is no longer a by-word and a hissing to a mocking earth, if the star-spangled banner floats only over free American citizens in every quarter of the land, and our country has before it a long and glorious career of justice, liberty, and civilization, we are indebted to the unselfish devotion of the noble army who rest in these honored graves all around us.

As U.S. Grant wrote as he was dying near Saratoga Springs, NY:

I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.

Trump Uses Nazi Analogy

Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to "leak" into the public. One last shot at me.Are we living in Nazi Germany?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

From the Anti-Defamation League:

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today voiced concern about a tweet from President-Elect Donald Trump that posed the question, “Are we living in Nazi Germany?” in response to news coverage over intelligence agency revelations on alleged Russian government intervention in the 2016 election.

Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL CEO, issued the following statement:

The President-Elect’s use of Nazi Germany to make a political analogy is not only an inappropriate comparison on the merits, but it also coarsens our discourse and diminishes the horror of the Holocaust.

There are legitimate questions on all sides regarding foreign influence in the 2016 presidential race. But the United States has democratic elections, a free press, rule of law and a civil service -- including our intelligence agencies -- that is deeply loyal to the U.S. Constitution. These facts invalidate any analogies between America and totalitarian societies.

ADL always has maintained that glib comparisons to Nazi Germany are offensive and a trivialization of the Holocaust. We have a long record of speaking out when both Democrats and Republicans engage in such overheated rhetoric. It would be helpful for the President-Elect to explain his intentions or apologize for the remark.

"America Is Great Because America Is Good"

My piece at The Christian Science Monitor:

"America is great because America is good,” said Hillary Clinton during her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. Immediately, her critics went on social media to accuse her of plagiarizing Alexis deTocqueville, French author of the 19th-century classic, "Democracy in America." But Tocqueville never wrote any such thing.

Various forms of the spurious quotation (often including such purple prose as “pulpits aflame with righteousness”) have been circulating for decades. It is unclear where it all started, except that we do know that these words appear nowhere in Tocqueville’s works. Nevertheless, politicians of all stripes have long been fond of using the lines, usually with the false attribution. Indeed, one repeat offender was none other than President Bill Clinton. He credited Tocqueville with saying “America is great” on many occasions – including the video that preceded his own acceptance speech at the 1996 Democratic convention.

It’s purely a guess, but it seems plausible that Mrs. Clinton or her speechwriter heard the phrase in that video and decided to recycle it 20 years later. One cannot charge her with plagiarizing Tocqueville since the latter didn’t write it in the first place. But was she plagiarizing her husband? Maybe it doesn’t count if it’s all in the family, or perhaps the phrase is so short and familiar that it comes under the heading of “common knowledge.” I will leave such judgments to the experts in literary ethics.

Plagiarism

Peter Schroeder reports at The Hill

Experts that hunt out plagiarism professionally say there is basically no chance that Melania Trump’s speech Monday night did not steal lines from a 2008 Michelle Obama speech.

Turnitin, a California-based company, uses a computer algorithm to automatically vet submitted writing for any matches that could amount to plagiarism. Following the controversy Monday, the company used that tool to analyze Trump’s Republican National Convention speech.
...
Chris Harrick, Turnitin vice president of marketing, told The Hill on Tuesday that 6 percent of Trump’s speech was determined to have language that matched with other existing text. All 6 percent came from Obama’s 2008 speech at the Democratic National Convention.

Harrick noted that the company does not play “judge and jury” on whether something was plagiarized, but the odds that Trump’s speech did not include plagiarized content are effectively a mathematical impossibility.

According to Turnitin, there is a 1 in 1 trillion chance that two writers would write the same 16-word sequence by coincidence. The longest matching sequence of words between the Trump and Obama speeches was 23 words.

Politicizing

Immediately after the recent shooting in Oregon, the president said: "And, of course, what’s also is that somebody, somewhere will comment and say, Obama politicized this issue. Well, this is something we should politicize."  On many other occasions, however, the president has warned against politicizing various things. Some examples:

• "As I said, it is very important for us not to politicize the relationship between Israel and the United States. "Remarks Prior to a Meeting With Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter and an Exchange With Reporters," March 3, 2015. 
• "There has been talk about, should we convene a conversation on race? I haven't seen that be particularly productive when politicians try to organize conversations. They end up being stilted and politicized, and folks are locked into the positions they already have." "Remarks on the Verdict in State of Florida v. George Zimmerman," July 19, 2013. 
• "Everything has become politicized, from the most modest appointment to getting judges on the bench, to trying to make sure the economy grows. Everything has been looked at through a political lens. And that is what people are tired of." "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in New York City," November 30, 2011.
• "We had hoped that in this once-in-a-generation challenge that we were facing that we would see an end to some of the game-playing and posturing and politicizing of everything we did because there would be a recognition that this was an urgent time and we had to take some key steps not only for the next several years, but to ensure that we were going to be competitive in generations to come." "Remarks at a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Dinner in Providence," October 25, 2010.
•  "And that's why this election coming up is so important because we essentially have to say that those who are politicizing the issue, who are supportive of the Arizona law, who talk only about border security but aren't willing to talk about the other aspects of this, who don't support the Dream Act, who are out there engaging in rhetoric that is divisive and damaging that -- those aren't the kinds of folks who represent our core American values." "Interview With Eddie "Piolin" Sotelo on Univision Radio Network's "Piolin pr la Manana"," October 25, 2010.
• "So--but what is absolutely true--and this goes to the point you were making earlier, John, about midcourse corrections--the rhetoric and the politicizing of so many decisions that are out there has to be toned down."  "Remarks at CNBC's "Investing in America" Town Hall Meeting and a Question-and-Answer Session," September 20, 2010. 
• "Now, over the last several weeks, we've seen a return of the politicization of these issues that have characterized the last several years. I'm an elected official; I understand these problems around--arouse passions and concerns. They should. We're confronting some of the most complicated questions that a democracy can face. But I have no interest in spending all of our time relitigating the policies of the last 8 years. I'll leave that to others. I want to solve these problems, and I want to solve them together as Americans." "Remarks at the National Archives and Records Administration," May 21, 2009.
• " I do worry about this getting so politicized that we cannot function effectively and it hampers our ability to carry out critical national security operations."  "Remarks Following a Meeting With King Abdullah II of Jordan and an Exchange With Reporters," April 21, 2009.
• 'Now, we came close to getting that kind of reform done several years ago, and then it became politicized. And my whole goal is to remove the politics of this and take a very practical, commonsense approach that benefits people on both sides of the border and creates a secure and safe border so you don't have people who are dying in the deserts as a consequence of a disorderly and illegal migration process." "The President's News Conference With President Felipe de Jesus Calderon Hinojosa of Mexico in Mexico City," April 16, 2009.  
• "It is time that we end the politicization of this issue. In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world." "Statement on the Mexico City Policy and Assistance for Voluntary Population Planning," January 24, 2009.

In Honor of the Late Yogi Berra: Fake Quotations on Social Media

The great Yogi Berra has passed.  As Ralph Keyes writes in The Quote Verifier, "it is safe to assume that most of the most popular sayings attributed to Yogi Berra are spurious."

Spurious quotations of other historical figures have been much in circulation on Facebook and Twitter.  A sampler:




From George Washington's Mount Vernon:

"This quote is partially accurate as the beginning section is taken from Washington's First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union. However, the quote is then manipulated into a differing context and the remaining text is inaccurate. Here is the actual text from Washington's speech:

`A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.'"





The "Positive Atheism" site lists this line on its list of "Phony James Madison Quotations"

But here is something he actually did say:

"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?"







Eoin O'Connor writes at The Christian Science Monitor:

"This line is probably the best summary of Gandhi's philosophy of satyagraha as you can get in 16 words. But there's no evidence that the Great Soul ever said this."

 As mentioned before, Populists 
concocted this one, and Lincoln's private aide called it a "bald, unblushing forgery."  Not only did Lincoln never say these words, they were at odds with his thinking, as Andrew Ferguson explained : "A corporate lawyer whose long and cunning labor on behalf of the railroads earned him a comfortable income, Lincoln was a vigorous champion of market capitalism, even when it drifted (as it tends to do) toward large  concentrations of wealth."







TOCQUEVILLE NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING!

Civility and Deliberation

At Commentary, Peter Wehner explains the connection between civility and deliberation:

What civility attempts to do is to advance a certain mode of discourse, particularly when it comes to debates and disagreements with our fellow citizens. It assumes that in most cases – absent fairly extraordinary exceptions – basic good manners is what we owe others as fellow citizens and fellow human beings. Civility also helps inoculate us against one of the temptations in politics (and in life more broadly) — to demonize and dehumanize those who hold views different from our own. Civility is, as Stephen Carter has written, a precondition of democratic dialogue. It is also something that is prized within the Christian faith. “Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt,” St. Paul wrote in his letter to the Colossians, “so that you may know how to answer everyone.” And to the Galatians, Paul describes the fruits of the spirit as love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Incivility is notably left off the list.

My friend Mike Johnson recalls a recently-departed friend and aide to House GOP Leader Bob Michel:

He also had profound insight into human relationships and political behavior. One meeting I remember in the Capitol office with leaders from the Illinois and Peoria NAACP that serves as an example.

There was intense back and forth over an issue – I don’t remember the nature of it – and well into the exchange, Gavin, in a very rare interruption, said in very diplomatic terms that the meeting should end. He said something to the effect, of ‘regrettably gentlemen we can reach no conclusion here because underlying the discussion is a lack of trust in each others’ motivation. If one does not trust the motivation of the other, there can be no amicable conclusion to any conversation. Better to talk when both sides believe the other is doing what they believe to be right.’

Fake Lincoln in Pravda

A Pravda article by Moti Nissani starts with this quotation

The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." -- Abraham Lincoln, president of the United States

As previous posts have noted, this quotation is fake.  Lincoln never said anything of the kind.

Thomas Schwartz traced the history of the fake quotation in his 1999 essay "Lincoln Never Said That,"

By the way, Pravda is the Russian word for "truth."

Cruz Channels JFK

Ted  Cruz announcement: "What is the promise of America? The idea that — the revolutionary idea that this country was founded upon, which is that our rights don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty."

John F. Kennedy inaugural address: "And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."

Checking Lincoln Quotations

Today is Lincoln's birthday.  Previous posts have discussed dubious Lincoln quotations.

If you hear questionable Lincoln quotations, ere are some resources for checking them out.

Sites with Lincoln material:

• Gordon Leidner, "Did Lincoln Really Say That?"
• "Abraham Lincoln Quotations and Sayings, Spurious"
• Excerpt from Ralph Keyes, The Quote Verifier
• The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln
• The Papers and Writings of Abraham Lincoln

General guides to quotations:

• Respectfully Quoted
• Quote Investigator

Hardcopy Books:

• Don Fehrenbacher, The Recollected Words of Abraham Lincoln
• Paul F. Boller, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions
• Ralph Keyes, The Quote Verifier: Who Said What, Where, and When