Barack and Some Rhetoric

"President Bush made his case for war at the United Nations. Standing in front of a world that stood with us after 9/11, he said, "In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies.' Then he talked about Saddam Hussein - a man who had nothing to do with 9/11. But citing the lesson of 9/11, he and others said we had to act. "To suggest otherwise,' the President said, "is to hope against the evidence.' George Bush was wrong. The people who attacked us on 9/11 were in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist before our invasion. The case for war was built on exaggerated fears and empty evidence."

Barack Obama made this statement during a speech in Iowa on September 12, 2007. This was exactly 5 years after George Bush had declared war on Iraq. The date remains one of great importance and a common topic for pre-polling debate between candidates.

He uses narrative of what President Bush had said via a quote about the 9/11 attacks. By utilizing Bush's words about "destructive intentions of our enemies" he appeals directly to his audience's sense of pathos. Sympathy for those who lost their lives and their families is a strong tool that is being used in relation to the upcoming election. By activating an audience's pathos he can place himself on the same level of emotion as them and this is a strong connection that he now shares with potential voters. This general sense of empathy for those who suffered loss is clearly utilization of pathos.

"George Bush was wrong". This statement that Senator Obama made directly attacks President Bush. President Bush of course will not be an opponent of Obama but as often as possible Obama will point out that Bush was wrong and by stating that an ethos appeal is made. If George Bush is wrong and Obama has the ability to point out errors then Barack gains the authority over the subject. With this security of authority Obama's ethos appeals are much stronger. THis comparison-contrast shows that one is right compared to the other. Furthermore, any opponents who attempt to side with what President Bush has done are now viewed by Obama supporters as wrong simply because George Bush was wrong. This is most often viewed as a cause and effect argument. What George Bush did was wrong. Obama comes out directly to state that fact. With that cause the effect is that any supporters of Bush are now neglible.

The multiple uses of quotes are examples of what has been done in the past and Barack uses these examples to prove that what was done was incorrect and that as President, he will be able to avoid making these mistakes that he knew were wrong to be making. The classic learning by example is used here. Barack has learned from Bush's examples however good or bad they may have been. This appeal is made to his audience (potential voters) as a means of persuasion.

Again Obama uses Bush's previous decisions and points out that George Bush made a hasty generalization. By pointing this rhetoric Barack can gain power from those who are going to cast their votes in the upcoming election. The hasty generalization that Barack gives is that Bush and his administration believed that the terrorists who were responsible for the attacks against the United States were in Iraq. Rather, the true terrorists, Al Qaeda were within the borders of Afghanistan. Hindsight is twenty-twenty. However by pointing out this hasty generalization Barack makes it believe that he will not be responsible for such hasty generalizations.

Not mentioned in this post due to length and space constraints was Barack's story of a woman who told him that her nephew was deploying to Iraq and that she would not be able to breathe until he was safely returned. By beginning his speech with this story Barack utilizes a red herring. While not fully distracting his audience from what he is talking about the story does indeed detract people's attention and is an effective way of accessing their pathetic emotions via pathos rhetoric.