Rhetorical Activity 3

Rhetorical Activity 3
Tonight Barack Obama’s state of the union speech was a lot of things. As Americans have come to expect Obama’s rhetoric was impeccable, persuasive, and charismatic. It would appear however that the most compelling part of this speech was in the bravery it took for Obama to take on the whole room on the uncomfortable issues, especially those dealing with the internal affairs of Washington behind closed doors.
A New York Times editorial laid out some of the overarching themes and intentions of tonight’s State of the Union address. Americans have begun to feel uneasy and skeptical with regard to the future of crucial issues along with Obama’s competency as a president and ability to assert his will in a strong enough manner to actually facilitate some kind change that Americans can believe in. This New York Times editorial suggests that tonight’s address was a crucial focal point in the future of United State’s morale. Obama needed to spark a flame under his fellow Democrats tonight to stand up for the beliefs and promises that created and allowed for a congressional majority the Democrats have not been fortunate to have in the past couple decades. Attempting to dissect the rhetoric of Obama’s State of the Union Address in its entirety, after only one viewing, is a daunting task to say the least. So, for practical purposes I will only comment on three important and defining issues portrayed in Obama’s speech and also in the New York Times editorial.
Obama spent a significant amount of time building his argument touching briefly on all the noble causes and calls to action one would expect from an Obama speech. Obama proceeded to outline the one of the first big issues, the inability for coherent communications between democrats and republicans. The stasis of this assertion lies in conjecture. By crossing the aisle and acknowledging the reality of “fundamental differences in ideologies” between the democrats and republicans Obama attempts to open the flood gates for discourse. Obama effectively presented that lack of communication or consensus across party lines exists, and that it is a problem.
This problem is embodied in the next issue of leadership and Washington’s reputation for conducting merely in re-election politics. Stasis in this argument is found in definition, more specifically the definition of leadership. Obama asserts that the Republican’s new habit of killing democrat legislature by filibuster is not leadership but irresponsible and dangerous politics. Republicans must start leading instead of simply saying no to any idea presented by the Democrats. Obama however did not leave out the Democrat from blame for failure in productivity. Obama made clear the rare opportunity that is a congressional majority that Democrats seem eager to squander. Obama, in grave seriousness, called for leadership in his own party seemingly holding equal servings of responsibility for the inactivity of Washington Democrats who were elected to make change.
In the last issue being discussed Obama called out both sides of the aisle for their cynicism and lack of faith in colleagues across the table. In this issue the answer to the question of stasis resides in quality. Obviously the monster Washington politics has become is a bad thing, and, furthermore, detrimental to the functioning of the United States democracy.
The stand taken against the President’s speech tonight found life through brief apathetic commentary that does not desire to establish stasis of any form. Directly following the President, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal took the podium for the republican response. In the closing minutes of his address, Obama’s calls for leadership, bipartisanship, and a shift from cynicism rung in silence. By the tone and mood of Governor Jindal’s response it was hard to hear anything over his condescending and sarcastic depiction of Obama’s initiatives, leaving little hope for Obama’s fleeting dream of a Golden Age American government when politicians are not consumed by party lines, but consume their time serving the people.