0
Usenet Posted 22 years ago
Usage
Reagan's Speech on the Berlin Wall
In 1987, Peter Robinson wrote the speech in which Ronal Reagan demanded that Gorbachev should tear down the Berlin Wall. It seems, however, that quite a few people didn't want him to make such a demand at all. According to Robinson, after he had written the speech: "The speech then went to staffing, and as close as we ever got to open warfare in the Reagan White House then broke out. For three weeks, the State Department and the National Security Council fought the speech."
Does anyone have any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.
Curious
Does anyone have any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.
Curious
Top answer
[nq:1]In 1987, Peter Robinson wrote the speech in which Ronal Reagan demanded that Gorbachev should tear down the Berlin Wall. any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? [/nq] The speech went to the White House staff for review.
- [nq:1]In 1987, Peter Robinson wrote the speech in which Ronal Reagan demanded that Gorbachev should tear down the Berlin Wall.
- any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context?
- [/nq] The speech went to the White House staff for review.
- "Staff" in this sense, refers to the advisors and aides of the President.
- The Press Secretary, for example, is considered to be part of the White House staff.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
31 Answers
0
[nq:1]In 1987, Peter Robinson wrote the speech in which Ronal Reagan demanded that Gorbachev should tear down the Berlin Wall. ... any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.[/nq]
The speech went to the White House staff for review. "Staff" in this sense, refers to the advisors and aides of the President. The Press Secretary, for example,
The speech went to the White House staff for review. "Staff" in this sense, refers to the advisors and aides of the President. The Press Secretary, for example,
00
[nq:1]In 1987, Peter Robinson wrote the speech in which Ronal Reagan demandedthat Gorbachev should tear down the Berlin Wall. It ... any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.[/nq]
Either:
1. Misstatement for Reagan's personal WhiteHouse staff. or
2. Current local usage in the White House in
1987 for (perhaps) Reaga
Either:
1. Misstatement for Reagan's personal WhiteHouse staff. or
2. Current local usage in the White House in
1987 for (perhaps) Reaga
00
[nq:1]Does anyone have any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.[/nq]
It means having the document reviewed by all the interested parties, not necessarily limited to staff (as opposed to line) personnel. In the example cited, the State Depertment objected to the speech. The State Department is not part of the White House Staff.
The
It means having the document reviewed by all the interested parties, not necessarily limited to staff (as opposed to line) personnel. In the example cited, the State Depertment objected to the speech. The State Department is not part of the White House Staff.
The
00
[nq:1]The reason for "staffing" a speech, or any other document, is to make sure that everybody is in agreement, that ... one part of the organization is not saying one thing while another part of the organization is saying something contradictory.[/nq]
And when it doesn't function as designed, you wind up with a president stating (falsely) in his State of the Union address that Iraq attempted
And when it doesn't function as designed, you wind up with a president stating (falsely) in his State of the Union address that Iraq attempted
00
[nq:1]"The speech then went to staffing, and as close as we ever got to open warfare in the Reagan White ... any idea what exactly is meant by "staffing" in this context? I can't seem to make any sense of it.[/nq]
It appears to mean "vetting (of the speech) by staff". Right or wrong, it certainly makes sense.
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
It appears to mean "vetting (of the speech) by staff". Right or wrong, it certainly makes sense.
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
00
[nq:1]And when it doesn't function as designed, you wind up with a president stating (falsely) in his State of the Union address that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from an Africal Country.[/nq]
Are you sure about that parenthesis? My recollection is that, in that address, he stated (truly) that British intelligence services were alleging that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from an African count
Are you sure about that parenthesis? My recollection is that, in that address, he stated (truly) that British intelligence services were alleging that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from an African count
00
[nq:2]And when it doesn't function as designed, you wind up ... that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from an Africal Country.[/nq]
[nq:1]Are you sure about that parenthesis? My recollection is that, in that address, he stated (truly) that British intelligence services were alleging that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from an African country.[/nq]
If I'm not mistaken, they still so allege.
[nq:1]Are you sure about that parenthesis? My recollection is that, in that address, he stated (truly) that British intelligence services were alleging that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from an African country.[/nq]
If I'm not mistaken, they still so allege.
00
Reagan is dead at 93. Too bad his legacy legacy won't die with him, though.
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
00
On 6 Jun 2004 03:09:22 GMT, CyberCypher
[nq:1]Reagan is dead at 93.[/nq]
I suppose this is an acceptable statement, but it's odd. He will also be dead at 94, 95, 96, etc
It takes longer to say "Reagan died at the age of 93.", but it somehow indicates that the counting is over.
[nq:1]Reagan is dead at 93.[/nq]
I suppose this is an acceptable statement, but it's odd. He will also be dead at 94, 95, 96, etc
It takes longer to say "Reagan died at the age of 93.", but it somehow indicates that the counting is over.
00
[nq:2]Reagan is dead at 93.[/nq]
[nq:1]I suppose this is an acceptable statement, but it's odd. He will also be dead at 94, 95, 96, etc[/nq]
But he won't be anymore at 94, 95, 96...He stopped being at 93.
I have no idea why his death affected me so deeply, I'm not even a Republican. I know he's better off right now and his family is relieved, but...
[nq:1]I suppose this is an acceptable statement, but it's odd. He will also be dead at 94, 95, 96, etc[/nq]
But he won't be anymore at 94, 95, 96...He stopped being at 93.
I have no idea why his death affected me so deeply, I'm not even a Republican. I know he's better off right now and his family is relieved, but...
0
Related Questions