This is not a sports post — hey, I’m on vacation. This also is not a political post. It is a post about language. Recently, an anonymous Romney adviser said of Romney, “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special.”
Everyone got outraged. Democrats attacked the statement and Romney distanced himself from it. The New York Times wrote an opinion piece mostly saying whoever made the remarks should come forward and after that criticizing Romney. But it never addressed the remarks themselves. I would like to ask these questions.
1. What is wrong with what the speaker said? Is there, in fact, something wrong with what the speaker said? Remember, we don’t know the speaker’s intent.
2. If the speaker had substituted “English heritage” for Anglo-Saxon heritage, would that have been better or would it not have made any difference at all?
Please don’t get political and talk about Romney and Obama. Just talk about the words in the statement.
For more background, here are two articles. To read the NY Times piece, click here. To read a piece from The Telegraph in England click here. The Telegraph writer defends the statement. You may not agree, but he’s smart and makes interesting arguments worth thinking about.
And please don’t get angry at me for bringing this up. I’m at a Shakespeare festival and I’m thinking about English stuff.