Below you will find two biographies on George Washington and Simon Bolivar. After briefly looking through those two biographies, watch the speeches given by George Bush and Hugo Chavez and answer the questions below:
Simon Bolivar
George Washington
1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar? Why or why not?
4) Respond to one other person's comments
1) I do think that it was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington and Simon Bolivar because they were fighting for the same cause. They are from different countries but I dont think that is any reason why they can't be compared. They also had a similar back ground.
ReplyDelete2)Hugo Chavez seemed to have more of a connection to his people. He talked with passion, and he was talking to them like they were all of his friends. George Bush seemed like he wasn't to confident.
3) Yes Hugo Chavez was more accurate because he talked about the history behind Washington and Bolivar. He seemed to have more information to back up what he wanted to say.
:) I agree with you Anisa! Hugo Chavez did seem more confident when he talked. and the passion that he seemed to have rubbed of on the audience.
DeleteI agree with you Anisa, and Simone. George Bush and Hugo Chavez both believed in the same things, and also Hugo Chavez was able to back up context about George Washington, and Simon Bolivar. When George Bush was talking, he cracked some jokes which Hugo Chavez was more serious, and didn't.
DeleteI agree with you I think that it is fair that they're being compared to each other because they were striving for the same cause, so it only makes sense to compare them. I agree Hugo did have more of a connect to his people I think that's because his speech actually had a more effective response.
Delete1)It was fair for George Bush to compare George W. and Simon Bolivar because there were many similarities between the two, and both supported the same cause.
ReplyDelete2) Hugo Chavez made more of a connection in my opinion, he seemed determined... like he was confident in what he said. George Bush did not use strong tone to make his point.
3)Hugo Chavez seemed more accurate in the description because he used history, and backround information.
1) It was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington and Simon Bolivar because they both believed in the same thing, and they both fought for what they believed in.
ReplyDelete2) George Bush wasn't talking in that much of a serious tone because he joked around, where Hugo Chavez was more serious, and passionate. It seemed that the people listening to George Bush's speech reacted just the way he wanted by laughing, and Hugo Chavez's audience seemed to be paying very close attention and cheering him on with what he was saying.
3) I do believe that Hugo Chavez was more accurate in comparing George Washington, and Simon Bolivar because he was able to give background on both, and he gave background on what they believed in.
1. It was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington & Simon Bolivar because they believed and strong stood up for the same cause and also had many similar traits.
ReplyDelete2. Hugo Chavez did make more of a connection because of his confidence and choice of words. He had depth behind what he was saying. On the other hand, George Bush was very blank and boring. He definitely had no enthusiasm and passion behind his point.
3. Hugo Chavez was more accurate because he talked used history to support his point between George Washington & Bolivar. He also used strong supporting details to back up his point.
I agree with you Noah, Hugo Chavez's use of details to back him up makes him more reliable
Delete1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteIt was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington to Simon bolivar because they were both similar in the idea of fighting for the right of your people. Also they both shared accomplishments such as defeating a power much stronger than their own.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
I believe his audience stayed mostly quiet when he was not not trying to be humerus mainly because they respect the idea of it and agree with him.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar? Why or why not?
I think he war more accurate. Mainly because he used different historical examples. He showed how the lives of both people influenced different events. He does show bias towards Bolovar. He shows George Washington as someone who punished people before he gave them rights.
I agree with Amir on how Hugo Chavez was better about making his point clear rather than George Bush.
Delete1. Yes the comparison was fair because, they were both alike and had the same kind of views for the people. They were both well known and stood up for the same rights. They also made progress for what they believed.
ReplyDelete2. Hugo Chavez was very serious and had a passionate friendly tone which I feel connected to the viewers. George Bush wasn't that serious in talking about these important men. Hugo Chavez made his point clear rather than George Bush who was a little hard to understand.
3. Hugo Chavez was definitely more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar. Hugo Chavez backed up his facts very well and used many details to support his point.
Lia I agree with you in all your statements because you noticed that they were both fighting for a similar cause and when you said Hugo Chavez had a friendly tone I agree with you because he was trying to persuade his audience for a reform of the country
Delete1It was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington to Simon Bolivar because both were monumental leaders that had one goal, which was to give countries their independence from being ruled over. They also implemented laws and ideas that have been preserved all this time and were the foundations for the governments that they have now.
ReplyDelete2 I think his audience was very compliant and satisfied because they agreed with what Bush was saying. Also I think that the way he compared them it made people pay more attention and respect him.
3 I think Hugo Chavez was more accurate in his description of George Washington and Simon Bolivar because he showed the major differences between them and how much more of a struggle it was for Simon to reach independence. He showed how George Washington did achieve independence for north America but didn't fix the corrupt ideas such as slavery or only focusing on the richer class. Then explained how Simon Bolivar who came from a hard life of poverty and struggle. Though he stood up and fought hard and long to gain independence for the different countries while abolishing slavery and giving them decent roles in society like being soldiers.
I agree with you callie, and think that you did a good job explaining
Delete1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteIt was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington to Simon Bolivar, because they were both revolutionary leader, that led two very different countries, but they both had the same ides.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
The audience seemed to agree with Hugo Chavez, and they were very enthusiastic and proud of what he was saying.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
He was more accurate, because he gave information that was persuasive, and showed that he knew what he was talking about, he also talked with more confidence unlike George Bush, and it made me want to believe him more.
Yaaass! I agree with you for question 3 because Chavez had valid and informational statements!
Delete1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteYes. They're are many evident similarities between the two. Washington and bolivar were both revolutionary leaders who displayed the same desire to better benefit their country. Those were main similarities along with many more.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
The audience played in active role in both speeches, However in Hugo's people had more of a serious perception which was triggered by the way he conveyed his speech where as in Bush's' speech they was comedic relief and a lighter tone when delivering his speech
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar? Why or why not?
I feel that Hugo Chavez was more accurate in how he described the two because of the way he did it. He provided a lot of background information that further proved his point. By doing this he displayed his credentials and made him seem as a very reliable source. His tone was also very engaging which also made the audience more intrigued.
1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not? Yes, because he was saying good things that they both did, like creating a stronger colonial power.
ReplyDelete2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison? I think the audience agreed that George Washington and Simon Bolivar were similar because that's what their president believed.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar? Why or why not? Hugo Chavez thought Simon Bolivar and George Washington were completely different and gave more reasons on how they were different.
I don't agree with your first answer because I do not think that George Bush presented his speech in a way that could be taken seriously by the audience. He was making a comparison, but not presenting it in the right way.
Delete1. I think it was fair that George Bush compared the two because they are very similar there both fighting for similar causes.
ReplyDelete2.Hugo Chavez seemed more reliable and passionate and confident in his words rather than George Bush.
3. Hugo Chavez had better accuracy in the comparison, he gave great background information and details on the two.
I agree with you Emily, Hugo Chavez did have a lot of background information for better accuracy on his comparisons
Delete1) No, because even though they fought for the same beliefs they are both two different freedom fighters George washington fought for more economic freedom from the english empire and simon bolivar fought very powerfully for social freedom
ReplyDelete2)I think the audience contributed to George bush's comparison because everyone wants to have freedom and have rights and be free in away and that contributed to bush's comparison because both George washington and simon bolivar were freedom activist and fighters.
3)Yes, Because he is accurate with describing washington and bolivar because in the biography of washington and states that he owned a lot of land owned plantations and fought for economic freedom and in bolivars biography it says exactly what hugo Chavez said, he has historical background to back up his comparison.
I agreee to the max antonio good way or backing up your statements.
Delete1) I think it was fair that George bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar because they were both fighting for the same causes and both people had a lot of similarities also.
ReplyDelete2)I think his audience contributed to his comparison because when talking about both Simon Bolivar and George Washington , he was comparing them to show how much they were alike. He was also very confident in what he was saying cause it seemed like he was fighting for the people to agree with him so he can give them what they want in life.
3) Yes, i think Hugo chavez was accurate in comparing George Washington and Simon bolivar because everything he said, he always had something to back it up with and more information to tell the audience .
1) I don't think that it was fair that George Bush compared George Washington and Simon Bolivar because even though they believed in the same things, they were separate people and should be seen for their accomplishments.
ReplyDelete2) George Bush presented his comparison in a humorous way, so his audience reacted by laughing. This would make the effect of his comparison to be not as serious as Hugo Chavez's was.
3)Hugo Chavez seemed to be very prepared with his knowledge of Washington and Bolivar. He presented facts that he was able to back up.
Yeah taylor I agree that George Bush shouldn't have compared George Washington and Simon Bolivar to one another.
Delete1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteYes I do think that it's fair that Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar because they do have many similarities in the way they led their country. They both had the same drive to do what was the best for the people.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
I think that the audience had a big influence on the comparison. In Hugo Chavez speech it was more of a serious and strict response but still supporting. With George Bush's speech it was a lighter mood and it was humorous but that was the angle he was striving for.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolivar? Why or why not? I believe that Chavez's speech was more accurate due to the audience's serious response I believe that makes a more effective speech. Being that he had a lot of factual information to support his statements it made it a lot more accurate.
1) I think that it was fair that he compared them to each other because they both fought for the same reason and they both were ran their people the same way and they did what was best for their people, so that they wouldn't revolt.
ReplyDelete2) Hugo Chavez had that attitude that he would push for what he wanted to be done. He also more of a peoples person and he interacted with his people a lot more than George Bush did. And George Bush really didnt have a strong so to say relationship with his people and he doesn't sound like a very confident person when he would give his speeches.
3) I think that he was more accurate because he had facts to back up what he was saying about George Bush and Simon Bolivar. There wasn't a point where he didn't have historical facts about both Bush and Bolivar to back up what he was saying about them.
1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDelete- No, because they see freedom differently from one another. Simon bolivar fought for very powerful social freedom and George Washington fought for more economic freedom.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
- I think the audience contributed to George Bush's comparison by everyone wanting to have freedom, to have rights and to be free.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
- Yes, because in the biography of Washington. It states that he owned a lot of land, owned plantations and fought for economic freedom. Bolivars biography it states exactly how Hugo Chavez has said. That he has historical background to back up his comparison about him.
1) Yes I think its fair to compare Bush and George to Simon B because they all were very determined leaders. Both created strong colonial power
ReplyDelete2) I think the audience had an influence on the comparison. One speech was loose and humorous, while the other one was serious.
3) I think Chavez speech was ore accurate because the audience actually retained it because it was more of a serious tone. He had valid statements.
1 ) i believe It was fair for Ex- president George Bush to compare George W. and Simon Bolivar because theirs many similarities and very determined to do the best for there nation.
ReplyDelete2 . George Bush presented his comparison in a humorous way just like he did everything in hes life but that another topic , he did this so his audience reacted by laughing. This would make the effect of his comparison to be not as serious as Hugo Chavez's was.
3. I think he was more accurate with the different historical examples. Giving the audience the sense of how serious the matter was .
1) I think it is fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivor because they both believed in and fought for the same cause
ReplyDelete2) I think Hugo Chavez did make a connection with the audience through his words because he lured them in with his determined and dedicated tone.
3) Yes, I think he was accurate because he used "logos" meaning that he provided factual information for his statements.
1. Yes I do believe that the comparison of George Bush, George W, Simon Bolivar was fair because, they were all very alike, all 3 shared the same views they had on people, and they all believed and stood up for the same rights. George Bush, George W. and Simon Bolivar were also all very motivated in doing what they felt was right to serve their nations the best way possible.
ReplyDelete2. Hugo Chavez seemed to be like a person who made more of a connection to his people. He talked with such passion and concern. He actually cared about the people who were in his nation as if they were friends. Also, Hugo Chavez spoke with confidence and that is something George Bush lacked. When George Bush spoke he seemed like he wasn't confident.
3. I do believe that Hugo Chavez was more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolivar. He gave a lot of background information, and facts. Within everything he said he always had a fact to prove his statement.
1 yes because they were fighting for the same cause the freedom of there people
ReplyDelete2 hugo chavez had made alot more conections with his people
3 yes and no because every one has there own discripion of gorge washington he was just using one view point
1) no its not fair that george bush compared these two different people even though they fight for the same causes.
ReplyDelete2) feorge Bush didn't put as much emotion in it was boring and not so much enthusiastic.
3) yes because he was so much enthusiastic and he also used akot of background. It seems that he was offened that they compared them. To him Simon bolivar is amazing
Vanessa ortega
1 Yes I think its fair to compare Bush, Washington and Simon because they all wanted the same thing which was freedom for their nation.
ReplyDelete2 Hugo chavez cared for his people a lot. He connected with all of them. His people liked him back.
3 Yes Hugo chavez was accurate on how he described George Washington and Simon Bolovar because he said a lot about them. Everything he said about them were true, they were facts about them.
1: Yes it was fair for Bush to compare Washington and Bolivar because They both had the same ideas, beliefs, and had similar wants.
ReplyDelete2: The audience found Bush's speech humorous, yet serious. His audience was amused, yet informed.
3: Hugo Chavez was accurate because he used a lot of facts and info that was relatable between the two.
-Luciano Cardoza
1. Yes, it was fair for G. Bush to compare the two historical figure. Both George Washington and Simon Bolivar were fighting to gain independence for the country, no matter what the risks.
ReplyDelete2. Yes, the audience did contribute. They had a sense of interest yet were amused by his humorous choice of word. He entertained and informed his public.
3. Yes, I feel Chavez had a better speech. He was more serious, and more informative. He was stating facts rather than cracking jokes. The public seemed to be more captivated.
I agree with the hick's first response because what George Bush said WAS fair.
Delete1)I wouldn't say that its fair or unfair. If that's what the man thinks then let him be, obviously people may think otherwise because they where definitely two different leaders.
ReplyDelete2)Since George Bush presented his speech in a humorous way by mocking the spanish language the audience reacted by laughing.
3)I'd say that Hugo Chavez was definitely more accurate because he pointed out their differences and spoke dominantly to the people.
1) Yes , I think it's a fair comparison because both Simon Bolivar and George Washington were fighthing for social or economical freedom. Hence, they were not only fighting for themselves but for their people. They were both Liberals before they reached to the top
ReplyDelete2) George Bush and Hugo Chavez's may have contributed with passion to support them because the figures that they both talk were figures that stood up for their people.
3) Yes because in the biography of Bolivar it says that he took the responsibility to liberate Peru and in the biography of George Washington it said that he owned alor of land
1) I think that it was fair of George Bush to compare George Washington and simon bolivar because they had similar views. They didn't want their countries to be ruled by other countries and wanted their country to have their independence.
ReplyDelete2) The audience contributed to the speech by responding positively to George Bush's word choice. The speech was very informative as well.
3) I would say that Hugo Chavez was more accurate because he used facts and information. He had facts to back up his statements as well.
1) I believe that it was fair for George Bush to compare George Washington and Simon Bolivar together, they were fighting for the same reason so what is there not to compare, besides the fact they're countries.
ReplyDelete2)Hugo Chavez seemed to be really connected to the people but as for George Bush not so much.
3) Yes, Hugo Chavez discussed the history of Washington and Bolivar considering he knew a lot about it.
I agree, george bush didn't connect with the people at all, and hugo chaves was more accurate
Delete1) I really don't think it was fair that George Bush was comparing George Washington and Simon Bolivar because even though they were agreeing with each other, they were also different people and they should be seen for what they did in life
ReplyDelete2) George Bush presented his speech in a funny way, because his audience reacted by laughing unlike Hugo Chavez.
3)Hugo Chavez was probably prepared with his information of Washington and Bolivar. All of his information and facts he used was able to back up.
1) I believe that it was fair for George Bush to be compared to George Washington and Simon Boulivar. What people aren't understanding is that, yes they were different people, but that still doesn't take away the fact that they were all fighting for all the same reasons.
ReplyDelete2) George Bush seemed to not be as serious as Chavez. He seemed to be more humerous. Chavez also was more involved with the people and more connected than Bush.
3) Yes because he came with information and used facts to back up what he was saying. It made him more presentable and believable as well.
1) I personally believe it was completely fair for George Bush to compare George Washington and Simon Bolivar because yes they might have differences but two people who are fighting for the same thing should be compared.
ReplyDelete2)Hugo Chavez really connected with the people, on a different level then George Bush he didn't seemed like he was to confident not as much as Hugo at least.
3) Yes, because Hugo Chavez was more accurate because he had so much information backing up what he said, mainly because of him talking about the history behind Washington and Bolivar.
1) George bush had a good idea to be similar to George Washington and Simon Bolivar because two people fight to try to compare it even though it has differences
ReplyDelete2) Both George Bush and Hugo Chavez have supported them because what they have said id what they want their people to know that figures they mention have helped the people.
3) Yes because George Washington had his own aloe of land in his biography and in the biography of Bolivar, it says he was responsible and remembers to liberate Peru.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1) Was it fair that George Bush compared George Washington to Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteNo it was not fair for George Bush to compare George Washington to Simon Bolivar because though they had some small similarities their differences made them both quite different individuals. They both fought for two different things, and were raised differently. While Washington fought for slavery, while Simon Bolivar freed his slaves and turned them into soldiers to fight with him, not work for him.
2) How do you think his audience may have contributed to his comparison?
George Bush was trying to get his audience onto his side, so he mentioned two powerful people, one from his land, and one that was not. He mentioned only positive ideas of Washington, and none of the things he did that would be frowned upon by anyone.
3) Was Hugo Chavez more accurate in how he described George Washington and Simon Bolivar? Why or why not?
Yes, Hugo Chavez was more accurate, compared to the way George Bush compared Washington and Bolivar. Not only did George Bush become less credible when he made a mistake almost saying that the statue of liberty was not far from the white house, but he also crack jokes to take up time. Chavez on the other hand, disagrees with Washington and then explains how wrong he truly was.
1) yes because george washington and simon bolivard were both good leaders
ReplyDelete2) Bush was trying to make the people listen to him
3. hugo chaves was more accurate, washington compared two people who werent even comparable, and he doesnt know how to be a good ruler, while hugo chaves was able to give evidence with everything he was saying
1: I agree that it was fair for Bush to compare Washington to Bolivar because they share the same ideas, and beliefs.
ReplyDelete2: Bush had his speech to be humorous, yet informative. His audience was amused and informed on the situation at hand.
3: Chavez was accurate because he used numerous facts that was relative to the two.
1. I agree that was it a good comparison to Washington to Bolivar because they overall shared the same ideas.
ReplyDelete2. Bush was trying to make people listen to him by being informative yet funny to keep the audience
3. Chavez was accurate because had many facts that proved and related to the two of them.