<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Simply put: La. members of Congress are sophomore-ish</title>
		<description>Comments for Simply put: La. members of Congress are sophomore-ish at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.theind.com</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 22:00:24 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26725</link>
			<description>I would assume that of all the skills a congressman would need to get elected excellent
great communication skills would be number one. Poor communicators simply don't win many congressional seats. So I can't say that I agree with your guess that the lack of sophisticated speeches is caused by dumber members of congress that can't help but communicate poorly.

Speeches in congress are no longer delivered for the ears of congressmen. Indeed most speeches and debates are delivered before a nearly empty chamber. In the vast majority of cases the intended audience for these speeches is the electorate. And I think this gradual change in audience can explain the drop in sophistication. Since there are a large number of Americans who can't write or comprehend past a 10th or 11th grade reading level it makes perfect sense to tone down the &quot;sophistication&quot; so they can get your message as well.

Huey Long was known as one of the most brilliant communicators of his time. He was considered a genius by many. When he spoke in front of a group of Lawyers he would use sophisticated
language. But when he spoke to the everyman he toned it down big time. He used their unsophisticated sayings and truisms. And spoke at a level that they could understand and relate to even if it was only at a 6th grade level. And just because those speeches weren't sophisticated didn't mean Long himself wasn't sophisticated. The same reasoning should apply to our congressmen. - Eric Yongue</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:32:46 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26724</link>
			<description>Maybe the story isn't clear, Mitchell: Of the 20 LOWEST SCORING members of Congress the majority shares three characteristics: Republican, freshman and House members (as opposed to Senate).
The GOP took over the House a couple of years ago due in large part to a wave of Tea Party members -- Republican and freshmen -- beating mainstream GOP candidates.
So I'm making an inference not a deduction. - Walter Pierce</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 14:04:53 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26723</link>
			<description>I've little doubt, Dudley, in light of the many and sundry grammatical trappings I routinely festoon my prose with that I'm operating in an elevated, oxygen-deprived clime where only linguistic angels dare tread.
;) - Walter Pierce</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:58:03 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26722</link>
			<description>But I do find the article interesting and I think a case can be made that the Tea Party has dumbed down Congress. 


Of the twenty that you use as an example, 18 are members of Congress -- that leaves 513 members of Congress -- before you make a blanket statement that the Tea Party, is dumbing down Congress, you need to show how many of the other 513 Congressmen are members of the Tea Party -- or is it your contention that these 18 control Congress - Mitchell Douget</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:54:58 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26721</link>
			<description>Glad to hear no taxpayer money is being used for that. The Gettysburg address at 11.2 also? Most major newspapers written between an 11th and 14th grade level. At what level do you think 'The Independent' is written? Even more interesting, at what level do you, Walter, write at? ;) - Dudley E. LaBauve, III</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:44:39 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26720</link>
			<description>No taxpayer money involved, Dud. As the article indicates, the group did it &quot;just for fun.&quot; - Walter Pierce</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:31:09 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26719</link>
			<description>I find that many of the best speech givers or presenters are often the most ineffective doers, so, I also fail to see any real value in this study. Charles Boustany speaks at an 11.2 grade level, but is a heart surgeon? Me thinks he made it past the 12th grade, even if he speaks at the level of an 11.2 grader. That's a dumb study. It sounds like a waste of taxpayer money. - Dudley E. LaBauve, III</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:26:49 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/10548-simply-put-la-member-of-congress-are-sophomoric#comment-26715</link>
			<description>I'm failing to see the issue or the value in this study. - Matthew Rowzee</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 12:25:02 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
