PDA

View Full Version : ‘I,’ ‘Me’—Obama Uses First-Person Pronoun 117 Time



Sev
07-09-2012, 06:09 AM
Not to egocentric. <span style="color: #000000">


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/i-me-obama-uses-first-person-pronoun-117-times-1-speech
(CNSNews.com) - Speaking in Sandusky, Ohio on July 5, President Barack Obama used the first-person pronouns “I” and “me” a combined 117 times in a speech that lasted about 25 minutes and 32 seconds.

Obama used “I” 98 times and “me” 19 times, according to a transcript of the speech posted by the White House. A videotape of the speech posted on YouTube shows that Obama spoke for about 25-and-a-half minutes.

During this speech, Obama used “I” or “me” approximately once every 13.09 seconds.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also frequently used the first-person pronoun in his most recent speech that has been posted in its entirety on C-SPAN. Speaking in Salem, Va., on Jun 26, Romney used the first-person pronouns “I” and “me” a combined 55 times in a speech that lasted about 18 minutes and 13 seconds.

Romney used “I” 47 times and “me” 8 times. During the just over 18 minutes that Romney spoke at Salem, he used “I” or “me” approximately once every 19.87 seconds.

Near the end of his talk in Sandusky, Ohio, Obama told his audience he had made a commitment to think about them every morning when he arises.

“I want you to know that when I ran in 2008, I said I wasn't going to be a perfect man and I certainly wasn't going to be a perfect president, but I'd always tell you what I thought. I'd always tell you where I stood,” Obama said. “And, most of all, I would wake up every single day thinking about you…”</span>

Gayle in MD
07-09-2012, 11:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to egocentric. <span style="color: #000000">


http://cnsnews.com/news/article/i-me-obama-uses-first-person-pronoun-117-times-1-speech
(CNSNews.com) - Speaking in Sandusky, Ohio on July 5, President Barack Obama used the first-person pronouns “I” and “me” a combined 117 times in a speech that lasted about 25 minutes and 32 seconds.

Obama used “I” 98 times and “me” 19 times, according to a transcript of the speech posted by the White House. A videotape of the speech posted on YouTube shows that Obama spoke for about 25-and-a-half minutes.

During this speech, Obama used “I” or “me” approximately once every 13.09 seconds.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also frequently used the first-person pronoun in his most recent speech that has been posted in its entirety on C-SPAN. Speaking in Salem, Va., on Jun 26, Romney used the first-person pronouns “I” and “me” a combined 55 times in a speech that lasted about 18 minutes and 13 seconds.

Romney used “I” 47 times and “me” 8 times. During the just over 18 minutes that Romney spoke at Salem, he used “I” or “me” approximately once every 19.87 seconds.

Near the end of his talk in Sandusky, Ohio, Obama told his audience he had made a commitment to think about them every morning when he arises.

“I want you to know that when I ran in 2008, I said I wasn't going to be a perfect man and I certainly wasn't going to be a perfect president, but I'd always tell you what I thought. I'd always tell you where I stood,” Obama said. “And, most of all, I would wake up every single day thinking about you…”</span> </div></div>


<span style="color: #990000">How the hell do you expect a candidate to tell the people what his policies are, without using personal pronouns?

Doesn't surprise me that Romney uses fewer of them. He won't tell anybody anything about his policies, or his past. Nothing at all but lies about the president.

Even the right wing conservatives are complaining about him.

This is really one of your more desperate attempts to trash President Obama.

G.</span>

Gayle in MD
07-09-2012, 11:37 AM
Maybe you should stop counting personal pronouns, and think about something a bit more relevant:

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Meet the Money Man Behind Mitt's Offshore Accounts
By James Wolcott
10:25 AM, July 4 2012
E-Mail
0
The latest issue of Vanity Fair contains a blockbuster investigative report by Nicholas Shaxon about the untold millions salted away in offshore accounts by Republican presidential candidate and dashing jet-skiier Mitt Romney, who will travel this summer to the Holy Land to give Israeli prime minister Bibi Netanyahu a soothing neck massage. It was either that or rub Rush Limbaugh's feet and Mitt chose the latter, and who among us can blame him?


But to get back to Romney's Scrooge McDuck stash-a-ways, Shaxon makes clear that as an investor Mitt is truly an international man of mystery.

A full 55 pages in his 2010 return are devoted to reporting his transactions with foreign entities. “What Romney does not get,” says Jack Blum, a veteran Washington lawyer and offshore expert, “is that this stuff is weird.”

The media soon noticed Romney’s familiarity with foreign tax havens. A $3 million Swiss bank account appeared in the 2010 returns, then winked out of existence in 2011 after the trustee closed it, as if to remind us of George Romney’s warning that one or two tax returns can provide a misleading picture. Ed Kleinbard, a professor of tax law at the University of Southern California, says the Swiss account “has political but not tax-policy resonance,” since it—like many other Romney investments—constituted a bet against the U.S. dollar, an odd thing for a presidential candidate to do. The Obama campaign provided a helpful world map pointing to the tax havens Bermuda, Luxembourg, and the Cayman Islands, where Romney and his family have assets, each with the tagline “Value: not disclosed in tax returns.”

As a fillip to Shaxon's must-read report, it confirms my suspicions, which I first divulged on Twitter, that the financial engineer of Mitt's offshore money-parking was none other than Roger Van Zant, the head of Malibu Equity and Investments, which laundered money in the Caymans and Canary Islands and trafficked in bearer bonds until Mr. Van Zant's violent demise in 1995, when he was gunned down in his glassy home while watching a hockey game by career criminal and existential philosopher Neil McCauley.

While it would tempting to indulge in the conspiracy-plot spinning that would implicate Mitt Romney in Van Zant's whacking (for the sin of knowing too much about the migration of Mitt's money), no connection has ever been established between Van Zant's shooter and the GOP standard bearer. Never a man to let go of a grudge, McCauley whacked a lot of guys over the course of his career, and if he did Mitt any favors by eliminating the architect of the candidate's offshore financial operation, it was purely fortuitous.

But I do think that any reporters who interview Mitt between now and the election, assuming he deigns to speak to anyone apart from the cloth puppets at Fox News, should ask him about his relationship in the nineties with Roger Van Zant, which raises troubling concerns about the character and integrity of his plutocratic octopus and exactly how far and wide the suction cups of his tentacles reach.


</div></div>


http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2012/07/Meet-the-Money-Man-Behind-Mitts-Offshore-Accounts

Sev
07-09-2012, 11:47 AM
Perhaps he should talk about American exceptionalism and the American spirit instead of himself.

Gayle in MD
07-09-2012, 12:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps he should talk about American exceptionalism and the American spirit instead of himself. </div></div>

Then you'd be bashing him for nothing but rhetoric, and not expressing his own thoughts and ideas.

Hey, just admit it, you hate the guy. No matter what he would say or do, you'd still hate him and spend everyday searching for some irrelevant, bloviation to parlay into a major story.

Now you can bring up Bush and Cheney, and I'll say that I couldn't stand the sight of either one of them. I didn't have to dig around to find extraordinary un-Constitutional law breaking. That was their stated policies, that they were above the law, which they justified by scaring the hell out of Americans, with their lies.

The difference is that Bush and Cheney caused hundreds of thousands of needless deaths.

Obama uses drones to prevent more deaths of innocent people, and you think he's breaking the law.

If only Bush hadn't just been after oil for his cronies, and war profiteering pigs, and used drones, instead, how many people would still be alive, both Americans annd Iraqi's. Do you think its reasonable to shove democracy down the throats of every damned country, with bombs and guns, in order to steal their resources?

The last justifiable wars were WWII and and maybe Korea. Everything since then has been total BS, including Vietnam.

Do you know how many innocent people, men, women and children, lost their lives in a few days of Bush's Shock and Awe? AGainst a country that wasn't even a threat!

War is dumb. This president has been exceptional in his foreign policies. He was perfect in the way he handled Lybia. He's correct not to get our country entangled in Egypt, or Iran. Republicans are screaming for another pointless war. PIGS~!

If Romney gets in there, it will be war without end. He has surrounded himself with the same NEOCONS, who pushed for an occupation in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands dead and maimed, for what?

Oh, and BTW, Bush's "Surge" in Iraq, failed. The country is now in a civil war, just as I said it would be.

I suppose you think that's Obama's fault, too? You won't see this president lying to Americans in order to launch wars for the damned defence contrators, and oil corporations.

He stands head and shoulders above any Republican who ran for office in this campaign, annd especially, Mitt LIAR romney.

G.

Sev
07-09-2012, 12:14 PM
The man wants to preside over the decline of America. Anything that comes out of his mouth is to be seen as suspect.

Gayle in MD
07-09-2012, 12:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The man wants to preside over the decline of America. Anything that comes out of his mouth is to be seen as suspect. </div></div>

He inherited the decline of America, from your boys Bush and Cheney.

Name on president who launched two wars, hid the costs, spent like a drunke sailor, and cut taxes during war time? Just one!

Name one society that survived and thrived with only one percent of the wealthiest, owning the majority of wealth, and no gains for the middle class?

Just one!

Hey, we're wasting our drones in the Middle East. We should be using them to get the Wall Street CEO's who stole our money, and the energy Ceo's who are destroying the earth. Koch Brothers would get the first launched, two if I had my way.

Those are the guys whose whereabouts should be posted all over the internet, IMO. Cut off the heads of the snakes. That's my motto.


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif


G.

Soflasnapper
07-09-2012, 12:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps he should talk about American exceptionalism and the American spirit instead of himself. </div></div>

No, he should lapse into referring to himself in the 3rd person, as I think McCain used to (and likely still does).

Although it's creepy in its own way. Still, no more I, me, mine (old Beatles' tune).