Obama omits 'under god' in ken burns Gettysburg address

[Dot Com]

rw'ers are always claiming a monopoly on god & how this great nation would be nothing w/o a sky pixie No wonder they always screw up things when they eventually get power.

If the sky pixie were allah, same sky pixie by another name, the rw'ers wouldn't be having their self righteous , pity party.

He means the original author who left out the word "god" was dissing -

Or maybe he means Lincoln was dissing on god?

rw's are quietly slinking away to tell their lie someplace else.

fact is the AP reported that he said "under god"

and the only version signed by Lincoln contains the words "under god"

sure there are 5 versions

there maybe a 100 versions until one finds the right words

in writing a speech

i would say the one signed by him

would be the final product

What we have here is hysteria over the WORDS "under god". As if the world will blow up without them being mentioned. No.....we don't have godnuts trying to make us a theocracy....nope...not at all.

 

[bodecea]

fact is the AP reported that he said "under god"

and the only version signed by Lincoln contains the words "under god"

sure there are 5 versions

there maybe a 100 versions until one finds the right words

in writing a speech

i would say the one signed by him

would be the final product

Haiku John again...

The only one "signed"? What, it's like writing a check?
Is there a First National Bank of Speeches somewhere?

Whether you like it or not, this is how historians have regarded the Bliss copy. It's not my opinion or jb's.

It is the accepted opinion amongst historians.

Bliss Copy

Ever since Lincoln wrote it in 1864, this version has been the most often reproduced, notably on the walls of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington.

It is named after Colonel Alexander Bliss, stepson of historian George Bancroft. Bancroft asked President Lincoln for a copy to use as a fundraiser for soldiers (see "Bancroft Copy" below).

However, because Lincoln wrote on both sides of the paper, the speech could not be reprinted, so Lincoln made another copy at Bliss's request.

It is the last known copy written by Lincoln and the only one signed and dated by him. Today it is on display at the Lincoln Room of the White House.

The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

 

[tinydancer]

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

Someone really should have advised him against it. Bad PR.

 

[tinydancer]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

 

[koshergrl]

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Just when I think you're already as stupid as a non-disabled person can legally be...you prove me wrong.

I think this post will finally qualify you for SSI..if you aren't already on the dole.

 

[Pogo]

fact is the AP reported that he said "under god"

and the only version signed by Lincoln contains the words "under god"

sure there are 5 versions

there maybe a 100 versions until one finds the right words

in writing a speech

i would say the one signed by him

would be the final product

Haiku John again...

The only one "signed"? What, it's like writing a check?
Is there a First National Bank of Speeches somewhere?

Whether you like it or not, this is how historians have regarded the Bliss copy. It's not my opinion or jb's.

It is the accepted opinion amongst historians.

Bliss Copy

Ever since Lincoln wrote it in 1864, this version has been the most often reproduced, notably on the walls of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington.

It is named after Colonel Alexander Bliss, stepson of historian George Bancroft. Bancroft asked President Lincoln for a copy to use as a fundraiser for soldiers (see "Bancroft Copy" below).

However, because Lincoln wrote on both sides of the paper, the speech could not be reprinted, so Lincoln made another copy at Bliss's request.

It is the last known copy written by Lincoln and the only one signed and dated by him. Today it is on display at the Lincoln Room of the White House.

The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln

To me what's important is the concepts in the speech -- not the artifact it's printed on...

However, because Lincoln wrote on both sides of the paper, the speech could not be reprinted, so Lincoln made another copy at Bliss's request.

True. 1863's Xerox machines hadn't yet developed double-sided printing.

 

[koshergrl]

One of the concepts introduced early in the speech was that we are a nation under God.

 

[Pogo]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

As she said, to the rw's, its all about pr.

To the rw's , screw history. Just do what looks good.

And, she actually has a point. President Obama should never do something without first considering the ways in which the rw's will lie about it because, damn, they are quite creative.

Its the same lying rw's who fall all over themselves for Bill O'Reilly's Killing Lincoln. Never mind that its SO chocked full of lies and inaccuracies that the Ford Theater won't sell it in their gift shop. The rw's love it, lies and all, because Bill O'Reilly works for Muslim-controlled Fox.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

Someone really should have advised him against it. Bad PR.

Here's where she says PR is more important than historical fact.

 

[bodecea]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

^Meltdown material?

 

[koshergrl]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

As she said, to the rw's, its all about pr.

To the rw's , screw history. Just do what looks good.

And, she actually has a point. President Obama should never do something without first considering the ways in which the rw's will lie about it because, damn, they are quite creative.

Its the same lying rw's who fall all over themselves for Bill O'Reilly's Killing Lincoln. Never mind that its SO chocked full of lies and inaccuracies that the Ford Theater won't sell it in their gift shop. The rw's love it, lies and all, because Bill O'Reilly works for Muslim-controlled Fox.

Didn't popo just say that it was the concept, not the actual words, of the speech that mattered?

I'd say the revisionists are leftwing gasbags, per usual.

 

[koshergrl]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

No we are not. Irrelevant.

The discussion isn't about whether or not we are a theocracy. It is about the choice of Obama to choose the one speech draft that doesn't include God in it.

 

[tinydancer]

Pretty strange position by tiny dancer.

In point of fact, every scrap of paper that every president has even doodled on is kept and revered as a part of our history.

How typical of her to toss off Lincoln's notes as unimportant.

But, what she is really trying to do is demean the FACT that our president was asked to recite a particular version. She can't lie about that anymore so she's lying about Lincoln.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

Someone really should have advised him against it. Bad PR.

Here's where she says PR is more important than historical fact.

First draft is not historical accuracy.

That's not the speech he gave. Deal with it.

 

[koshergrl]

Progressives spent a hundred years trying to turn Lincoln into a democrat.

That has failed, so now they are striving to make him an atheist.

The saddest day of any progressive's life is the day he realizes that Christian and right wing ideals lend themselves to the liberation of opporessed classes, and progressive ideas lead to the killing of oppressed classes.

From the day they realize that, their entire being is consumed with the driving ambition to change history to hide that fact.

 

[tinydancer]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

No we are not. Irrelevant.

The discussion isn't about whether or not we are a theocracy. It is about the choice of Obama to choose the one speech draft that doesn't include God in it.

They cannot debate. Hence personal shots.

Who the hell reads a historical speech from a first draft?

 

[koshergrl]

An anti-American, anti-Christian piece of shit.

 

[Pogo]

Chew on this lib asswipes.

How bizarre would it be for any President to recite MLK's "I had a Dream Speech" from a draft copy that didn't include the phrase Let freedom ring?

Or JFK's Inaugural speech from a draft copy that didn't include "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."?

It would be pretty foolish, if not down right ridiculous.

False equivalence. Tries to compare inspirational 'hooks' with a throwaway line. Now if we were to excise the phrase "whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure" -- IOW a relevant part -- then you'd have apples to apples. Obviously the phrase "under God" was a supplementary afterthought (as were several other minor tweaks); the heart of the speech is in the original draft.

Hey drama queen, back up your statement that I am lying about Lincoln.



And I've not tossed off "Lincoln's notes" otherwise known as drafts as unimportant.

I actually find it quite fascinating that the first two drafts did not include "under God" but that in his speech when he delivered it that day, Lincoln spoke the words "under God" and that in all the other copies that phrase was included.

I'll be patiently checking in to see where you have proved me to be a liar about Lincoln.



ETA: I never disputed once that Obama was asked to read the Nicolay version. I was just in shock that his Team Obama actually believed it would be a swell idea for him to do so. Foolhardy bunch at the WH.

- Why?

Are we a theocracy?

No we are not. Irrelevant.

The discussion isn't about whether or not we are a theocracy. It is about the choice of Obama to choose the one speech draft that doesn't include God in it.

That choice would be Ken Burns', would it not?
Did he not actually have each version read by different people? Thought I read that backthread.

 

[koshergrl]

No, the choice would be Obama's.

Unless you maintain Obama is an idiot who doesn't review and approve the material he mouths.