GW tearing up the campaign trail. Literally.
"Circular Definition"
Definition:
The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition.
(A circular definition is a special case of a Failure to Elucidate.)
Example:
Someone asks you "What is a sovereign entity?".
Your response goes something like this: "A sovereign entity is an entity
that is sovereign".
That’s a circular definition.
In this video, you will see George W. Bush squirming to explain
something. It was a question I wouldn’t know the answer to, but then again
I’m not the president of the free world, and neither have I ever been the
governor of a state. If I were, I’d probably need to know how to answer these
questions.
Filed under: Politics by ramdac |
August 15th, 2004 at 5:27 pm
that is priceless, although the question does seem quite pointless
August 15th, 2004 at 6:13 pm
Yah. The guy obviously asked a question that isn’t what would be expected. No one else is talking about sovereign entities.
I would have told him “man, shut up before I put my sovereign foot up your ass.” Then again, that’s probably why I wouldn’t make it in a presidential race.
August 15th, 2004 at 8:05 pm
“No one else is talking about sovereign entities.”
that might be part of the problem. those soverign entities, whomever they may be, are probably ignored far too often. they’re ignored enough that W has no clue what in the blue blazes is going on when it comes to them. ramdac told me at one point he thought they were indian tribes, and if that is the case, then i don’t feel it’s an odd question - i think it’s actually a pretty important question, because they’re more a part of this country than we are in that they were here first.
August 16th, 2004 at 6:26 am
On a positive note,
I like the way he always uses his left arm to prop himself on the podium.
it sort of gives him this relaxed, “I don’t give a flip” look.
August 16th, 2004 at 8:59 am
Ok, maybe not the smoothest explanation but it does make “sense”. Look behind the scenes of the question and you can see why he answered it the way he did.
The question was (paraphrased) “What does tribal sovereignty mean to you?� (This is in reference too federally recognized American Indian tribes that have been given their own land). The question was implying that the federal government in the past has NOT recognized the tribes “sovereignty�. Bush understood what he was implying and was trying to make the point, “Look, I recognize the Indian tribes exactly as the definition “sovereign� means. They are an independent “SOVERGIN’ system and we are going to respect that.�
If you are a member of one of those tribal areas, then that is exactly what you wanted to hear. For those who care about the question, it was a good answer. For those who could care less about the question, the answer is not going to make a lot of sense regardless of what he said.
Ok, one last example.
It would be as if the question was asked “What do you think about the sovereignty of Cuba as a country�. The answer is obvious. You don’t step back and explain what “sovereignty means. That’s not the question. The question is really asking, will you respect the sovereignty of Cuba or try to take their rights away and invade or something. So the right way to answer the question is to reiterate that Cuba is sovereign, you recognize it as sovereign, and you will treat them with the full rights of a sovereign nation. And you are trying to say this without pissing off the Cubans in Florida who don’t want it Sovereign and want you to invade, and at the same time not piss off the Communist in the rest of the world who want you to stay out or they will give you a hard time. That is what is going on here.
And yeah, I am voting for Bush
August 16th, 2004 at 9:07 am
“they’re ignored enough that W has no clue what in the blue blazes is going on when it comes to them”
Not to debate whether “them” have what is just or not, but their are many people who have very passionate feelings on both sides of that issue. Particularly in the states that those tribes reside in. Bush very much knew what in “Blue Blazes” goes on when it comes to that issue and it pushed a “WARNING WARNING WARNING” button to watch how you answer the question or you will piss off one of the 2 groups, or just flat out everybody. It is a sensitive issue for those who are involved and he was WELL aware of that.
August 17th, 2004 at 7:09 am
I have no doubt he knew it was a sensitive issue.
I also have no doubt he had no clue how to explain it.
The question was not what “sovereign entity meant to [him]”. The question was “what do you think tribal sovereigny means in the 21st century.”
Many many politicians are able to give answers that mean absolutely nothing, but few are able to give answers that mean nothing, and sound dumb doing it.
Bush should have said that the territories owned by those tribes are completely independent, the people are self-governed, and they have all power and authority on their land–THAT is tribal sovereignty in the 21st century. These people should have had sovereignty all along.
August 17th, 2004 at 12:16 pm
for ryan h.
Score 5. Insightful
August 17th, 2004 at 1:39 pm
transcript: [democracynow.org]
dictionary: definition of sovereign
August 19th, 2004 at 1:26 pm
The question was not what “sovereign entity meant to [him]”. The question was “what do you think tribal sovereignty means in the 21st century.”
Yes, I caught that. I was “paraphrasing� not the “letter� of his question but the “sprit� of what he was really getting at, or at a minimum (in my opinion) how Bush perceived the question. When you are in politics (I work for the government) you get setup questions all the time, and you have to read in between the lines or you will get hammered later.
Granted, it was not the best possible answer to the question…but there was more going on than meets the eye. Yes, Bush is awkward with words sometimes, but he understands what is going on and can answer questions knowledgably when he is comfortable. Bill O’Reilly even said something similar in an Aug 13 interview with Alec Baldwin…..and as Bill would say…let the audience decide
August 19th, 2004 at 5:53 pm
It is a stupid question, other than being pointless, it really doesnt make since. It is kinda like saying how would you define a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, but you can use peanut butter and jelly. I cant figure out what the guy is looking for in an answer.
October 1st, 2004 at 1:37 pm
talk about a racist and absolutely colonialist message board. These messages really expose the absolute historical amnesia that exists throughout the United States. You make me feel embarrassed to be an American.