Democratic Illinois Senate representative Barack Obama as well as Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger both gave their speeches in 2004 at their political party’s convention. Although Barack Obama and Schwarzenegger each took a different approach as well as emphasized different ideas, both shared a distinctive similarity in the structure of their speeches. Similar rhetorical strategies are found due to their similarity in the structure of their speeches. These similar rhetorical strategies include metaphors and imageries. If both speeches are structurally similar, what sets them apart? The similarity in the structure of their speeches isn’t as noticeable as you’d expect because of their different tone as well as delivery.
It is polite to say, “Thank you”, after being applauded by an audience which both Barack Obama and Arnold Schwarzenegger had the pleasure of doing before their speeches. Barack Obama took a humble approach in his introduction by having his audience learn his background right after thanking his audience once again “let me express my deepest gratitude for the privilege of addressing this convention”. He recalls the struggles of his family namely his father, “He grew up herding goats, went to school in a tin-roof shack.” He ends his recollection of what most would call a sad backstory by expressing his gratitude to his family who are looking down on him with “great pride”. Unlike Obama’s humble introduction, Schwarzenegger addresses his acting career as well as makes a direct remark to the other political party “Speaking of acting, one of my movies was called “True Lies”. And that’s what the Democrats should have called their convention. Similarly he then recalls his past struggle as a child in a part of Austr...
... middle of paper ...
...rst option.”
Structurally speaking, both speeches are similar in almost every way, both recall a struggle of the past, both express the love both respective men share for America, and both advertise their respective presidential candidates. It’s the simple things that set these two speeches apart such as Obama referencing Abraham Lincoln and Schwarzenegger referencing his character in the movie “The Terminator”. Although both criticized, Obama was more implied and directed towards America in a subtle manner while Schwarzenegger was more direct to the other party, the democrats. Both had to deal with being racially different although it’s evident that being racially different was a more difficult task for Barack Obama due to being an African American. Both men in the end tried to impact the lives of their audience the same way their lives were impacted by America.
The purpose of an “inaugural address” is to inform the people of his or her intentions as a leader. Two of the most prominent inaugural addresses throughout history are Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s and Barack Obama’s. Franklin Roosevelt’s inaugural address stands the test of time because it gave the American people hope that they may overcome the terrible Great Depression. Similarly, Barack Obama’s address is well known because it inspired millions that we will be lifted out of economic crisis, but it was also remembered as the first inaugural address from an African American president. The inauguration speeches of Franklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama use the rhetorical devices parallelism, allusions, and emotive language to convey their messages
Both President Bush and President Obama had very different ways of running the country during their presidencies. Overall, President Bush used less persuasion on major domestic and foreign policies than President Obama. With these differences among the presidents, they both passed and approved laws that would try to better the nation and it’s citizens.
Both of these speeches talked about what each person wanted to do as president. Additionally they both talked about equality and how it is very important while being the president of the United States. They both talk about affirming the limits of power and unifying the country. They both relate things to Heaven and what Heaven and the bIble would think of problems. In paragraph 4 of Washington's Inaugural Address it states, “We cannot expect Heaven to smile upon a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right. Heaven itself has ordained these rules. The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, have been tied to this experiment entrusted to the American people.” In paragraph 9 of Obama’s Inaugural Address it states, “We remain a young nation, but in the words of the Bible, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit. We must choose our better history. We must carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation, the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.” This Although Barack Obama and George Washington have many differences in their Inaugural Addresses there are also many
Both leaders made progress with reforms and programs concerning health care and education, but only one of them would make an impact on the racial issues. Both leaders dealt with crises, both opting to step down or by vote lost their seat. To see their style of leadership shows us that leaders truly have to be carefully selected and then elected.
Ronald Reagan was one of the most liked Presidents. When being elected for his second term, he won by a landslide—winning all the states minus Minnesota and Washington D.C. Reagan addresses the people of the United States of America. He wants the American people to reflect on his presidency, and as all presidents do in their farewell addresses, he wants to say goodbye to the nation that he's led for the past eight years. Ronald Reagan uses repetition, parallel structure, and allusion to reflect on his presidency and to say farewell to the American people.
Though Kennedy and Clinton addressed their audiences nearly thirty-two years apart, each rhetor faced a common rhetorical barrier – an American populace too heavily focused on the personalities within each respective presidential election rather than the true issues confronting the United States. To overcome that barrier, both Kennedy and Clinton utilize definitional strategies – in the form of association – as well as language strategies –specifically, historical allusions. Whether or not the speeches directly correlate with both candidates winning their presidential elections does not concern the examination; this paper observes how exactly the rhetorical devices used served to dissolve the barriers between the rhetor and the intended audience.
While Lincoln’s speeches were great and well thought out, Roosevelt’s speeches were more persuasive and full of imagery that swayed audiences and help attention captive. Roosevelt had a way with words that Lincoln did not have. Roosevelt’s speeches were more upbeat and tried to lift spirits while Lincoln’s speeches saddened many. Franklin D. Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln. Two presidents in history whose speeches made a lasting impact on
As the President was ending his speech, he gives recognition to those American that are often overlooked. Due to, not having a political title or a high social class position. Throughout these recognitions, the president said “I see it”, which allows viewers to feel a sense of appreciation. By him addressing all walks of life, Americans were able to identify with the various situations and feel worthy and important. For example, Obama said “I see it in the American who served his time, and made mistakes as a child, but now is dreaming of starting over and I see it in the business owner who gives him that second chance.” This was impactful because there are millions of Americans that can relate to this story. So when they hear the president recognizing them despite one’s shortcomings is heartwarming. Furthermore, this emotional appeal leaves viewers with a good feeling about Obama, because they feel he understands them and has their best interest at heart. Therefore, Obama succeeded at being the voice of the people and touching their heart with his empathy and positive
"American Rhetoric: Ronald Reagan -- A Time for Choosing." American Rhetoric: The Power of Oratory in the United States. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.
Abraham Lincoln assumed the office of the President of the United States 153 years ago. Barack Obama did the same 148 years later. Nearly fifteen decades separate these two historical events and astounding men. While one man has gone to great lengths to model himself after the other, there was possibly a connection there all along. The differences between Lincoln and Obama are evident and expected, but the similarities are remarkable and extraordinary.
Obama finishes his address thanking God and proclaiming, “may He forever bless these United States of America.” For the final push of ethos to conclude his speech. References Martin Luther King Jr. - Acceptance Speech. The Novel Foundation, n.d. Web. The Web.
In the beginning of the speech Barack Obama reflects back to where his parents and grandparents came from and what they did as their occupation. Obama shows pathos, logos and ethos many times throughout his 2004 keynote speech. He also spoke on why his mother and father gave him the name that they gave him. By doing so, Barack Obama showed pathos throughout the speech and got his audience to know him a bit before pursuing the Democratic Party to vote for John Kerry. He appeals to his audience by mentioning that his parents are both passed away, and from the look of things that did not stop him from standing where he was that day with pride and sadness:
Both of the speeches, Martin Luther King's and Cesar Chavez', are powerful peices and communicate one vision: equality. King and Chavez have two very different styles of writing but the message from both is simmilar. for example both king and chavez discuss how their people are discriminated against because of their skin color, and how their people have neither the right to vote in the the south, nor the will to vote in the north , and in Chavez' situation, to have their vote counted. however similar their message's may be, their writing styles are different. Chavez talks about statistics, about why and how his people are treated. king held that the atrocitys commited against his people were self evident and as such did not need to be proved to anyone. kings message was meant to encompass the entire Uninted States while Chavez' was directed primarily at California.
The life of Julius Caesar is comparable to the life of Abraham Lincoln in a variety of ways. While unique similarities exist in the lives of these two men, distinct differences also exist. Abraham Lincoln was an orator; Julius Caesar a notable author of Latin prose. They were both leaders. Nowadays, people look up to them as heroes. They shared a significant amount of power in their respective nations. Both men were assassinated. Although a little similar, the manner of assassination of Julius Caesar was quite different from that of Abraham Lincoln. The Roman leader and the U.S. President both came from a different era; their backgrounds were also different.
In this paper I am going to discuss the rhetorical appeals, as well as the argumentative structure, audience and purpose set forth by George W. Bush in his September 27 speech in Flagstaff, Arizona. More specifically I will refer to the rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos, and explain how they are used to gain the support and attention of the audience and further the further the purpose of the speech. As I explain these appeals I will also give an insight into the argumentative structure and why it is apparent in this particular speech.