The way both of today's addresses were framed presents an interesting contrast.
Bush's subject: "to share our blessings with the least among us."
Vilsack's: "Unfortunately, the blessing of abundant food is not shared by all Americans"
Bush is full of crap, of course, and his remarks were focused on the "privitazation" of the concept of the safety net, more or less. ("Bush Calls on Americans to Volunteer, Give") But he strokes the listener, basically telling them just to be who they are, because they are wonderful and generous:
``We also recognize our duty to share our blessings with the least among us,'' the president said. ``Throughout the holiday season, schools, churches, synagogues and other generous organizations gather food and clothing for their neighbors in need. Many young people give part of their holiday to volunteer at homeless shelters or food pantries.
``On Thanksgiving, and on every day of the year, America is a more hopeful nation because of the volunteers who serve the weak and the vulnerable.'' -See? It's like a done deal. 'We do ALREADY recognize..', 'a buncha places ALREADY gather...' 'America is ALREADY more hopeful'
Vilsack stresses the growing need, and the (accurate) implication is that we aren't doing what we should and that we must change ourselves:
"Unfortunately, the blessing of abundant food is not shared by all Americans," Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack said. "A recent report from our Department of Agriculture documented an increase in hunger in America, particularly among our children."
........
"With these thoughts and prayers, we should rededicate ourselves to ensuring that all who've served our country receive the health and income benefits they have earned by their service."The problem is that no one wants to admit that they are part of the problem and it's almost impossible to define deficiencies without beating people over the head for their own failures. I'd *like* to beat them over the head, and it would be great if the public responded like a group of well-adjusted, responsible adults. If they did, massaging their flaky lazy egos wouldn't be necessary. But that's not realistic.
How could Vilsack's remarks have been more complimentary of his audience? -NOT watered down, but respectful of their good qualities; qualities that will compel them to accomplish the desired end. Is that possible?
about Bush's address-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4640077,00.htmland about Vilsack's-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=1&u=/ap/20041127/ap_on_re_us/democrats_vilsack