obama speech analysis essay

• Ethics & Leadership
• Fact-Checking
• Media Literacy
• The Craig Newmark Center
• Reporting & Editing
• Ethics & Trust
• Tech & Tools
• Business & Work
• Educators & Students
• Training Catalog
• Custom Teaching
• For ACES Members
• All Categories
• Broadcast & Visual Journalism
• Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
• In-newsroom
• Memphis, Tenn.
• Minneapolis, Minn.
• St. Petersburg, Fla.
• Washington, D.C.
• Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
• Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
• Ethics & Trust Articles
• Get Ethics Advice
• Fact-Checking Articles
• International Fact-Checking Day
• Teen Fact-Checking Network
• International
• Media Literacy Training
• MediaWise Resources
• Ambassadors
• MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

Why it worked: A rhetorical analysis of Obama’s speech on race

The National Conference of Teachers of English (NCTE) has declared today a National Day on Writing.  I celebrate such a day.  The introduction of my book "Writing Tools" imagines what America might look like and sound like if we declared ourselves a “nation of writers.” After all, what good is freedom of expression if we lack the means to express ourselves?

To mark this day – and to honor language arts teachers everywhere – Poynter is republishing an essay I wrote almost a decade ago.  Remember? It was the spring of 2008 and Barack Obama was running for president. Many of us wondered if America was ready to elect an African-American president (a man with the middle name Hussein).

To dispel the fears of some white Americans and to advance his chances for election, Obama delivered a major address on race in America, a speech that was praised even by some of his adversaries. Obama had/has a gift for language. He is a skilled orator. To neutralize that advantage, his opponents – including Hillary Clinton at one point – would characterize Obama’s words as empty “rhetoric” – an elaborate trick of language.

The Spring of 2008 seems like such a long time ago.  A time just before the Great Recession.  A time just before the ascendancy of social networks and the trolls who try to poison them.  A time before black lives were said to matter in a more assertive way. A time before fake news was anything more dangerous that a piece of satire in the Onion. A time before Colin Kaepernick took a knee — except when he was tired.  A time before torch-bearing white supremacists marched through the night in Charlottesville, Virginia.   

It feels like the perfect time for a restart on a conversation about race. To prepare us, let’s take another look at the words of Barack Obama before he was president. Let’s review what he said, and, more important, how and why he said it. My X-ray analysis of that speech is meant not as a final word on that historical moment, but as an invitation, a doorway to a room where we can all reflect on American history and the American language.

Have a great National Day on Writing.  

More than a century ago, scholar and journalist W.E.B. DuBois wrote a single paragraph about how race is experienced in America. I have learned more from those 112 words than from most book-length studies of the subject:

After the Egyptian and Indian, the Greek and Roman, the Teuton and Mongolian, the Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world, a world which yields him no true self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his two-ness, — an American, a Negro;  two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder."

Much has been said about the power and brilliance of Barack Obama's March 18 speech on race, even by some of his detractors. The focus has been on the orator's willingness to say things in public about race that are rarely spoken at all, even in private, and his expressed desire to move the country to a new and better place. There has also been attention to the immediate purpose of the speech, which was to reassure white voters that they had nothing to fear from the congregant of a fiery African-American pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. 

Amid all the commentary, I have yet to see an X-Ray reading of the text that would make visible the rhetorical strategies that the orator and authors used so effectively. When received in the ear, these effects breeze through us like a harmonious song. When inspected with the eye, these moves become more apparent, like reading a piece of sheet music for a difficult song and finally recognizing the chord changes.

Such analysis, while interesting in itself, might be little more than a scholarly curiosity if we were not so concerned with the language issues of political discourse. The popular opinion is that our current president, though plain spoken, is clumsy with language. Fair or not, this perception has produced a hope that our next president will be a more powerful communicator, a Kennedy or Reagan, perhaps, who can use language less as a way to signal ideology and more as a means to bring the disparate parts of the nation together. Journalists need to pay closer attention to political language than ever before.

Like most memorable pieces of oratory, Obama's speech sounds better than it reads. We have no way of knowing if that was true of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, but it is certainly true of Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech. If you doubt this assertion, test it out. Read the speech and then experience it in its original setting recited by his soulful voice.

The effectiveness of Obama's speech rests upon four related rhetorical strategies:

1.  The power of allusion and its patriotic associations. 2.  The oratorical resonance of parallel constructions. 3.  The "two-ness" of the texture, to use DuBois's useful term. 4.  His ability to include himself as a character in a narrative about race.

Allusion Part of what made Dr. King's speech resonate, not just for black people, but for some whites, was its framing of racial equality in familiar patriotic terms: "This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning, 'My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty of thee I sing.  Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring.'"  What follows, of course, is King's great litany of iconic topography that carries listeners across the American landscape: "Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!…"

In this tradition, Obama begins with "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union," a quote from the Constitution that becomes a recurring refrain linking the parts of the speech. What comes next is "Two hundred and twenty one years ago," an opening that places him in the tradition of Lincoln at Gettysburg and Dr. King at the Lincoln Memorial: "Five score years ago."

On the first page, Obama mentions the words democracy, Declaration of Independence, Philadelphia convention, 1787, the colonies, the founders, the Constitution, liberty, justice, citizenship under the law, parchment, equal, free, prosperous, and the presidency. It is not as well known as it should be that many black leaders, including Dr. King, use two different modes of discourse when addressing white vs. black audiences, an ignorance that has led to some of the hysteria over some of Rev. Wright's comments.

Obama's patriotic lexicon is meant to comfort white ears and soothe white fears. What keeps the speech from falling into a pandering sea of slogans is language that reveals, not the ideals, but the failures of the American experiment: "It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations." And "what would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part … to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time."

Lest a dark vision of America disillusion potential voters, Obama returns to familiar evocations of national history, ideals, and language:

— "Out of many, we are truly one." — "survived a Depression." — "a man who served his country" — "on a path of a more perfect union" — "a full measure of justice" — "the immigrant trying to feed his family" — "where our union grows stronger" — "a band of patriots signed that document."

Parallelism At the risk of calling to mind the worst memories of grammar class, I invoke the wisdom that parallel constructions help authors and orators make meaning memorable. To remember how parallelism works, think of equal terms to express equal ideas. So Dr. King dreamed that one day his four children "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." ( By the content of their character is parallel to by the color of their skin .)

Back to Obama: "This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign — to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America." If you are counting, that's five parallel phrases among 43 words. 

And there are many more:

Two-ness I could argue that Obama's speech is a meditation upon DuBois' theory of a dual experience of race in America. There is no mention of DuBois or two-ness, but it is all there in the texture. In fact, once you begin the search, it is remarkable how many examples of two-ness shine through:

— "through protests and struggles" — "on the streets and in the courts" — "through civil war and civil disobedience" — "I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas." — "white and black" — "black and brown" — "best schools … poorest nations" — "too black or not black enough" — "the doctor and the welfare mom" — "the model student and the former gang-banger …" — "raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor" — "political correctness or reverse racism" — "your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams"

Such language manages to create both tension and balance and, without being excessively messianic, permits Obama to present himself as the bridge builder, the reconciler of America's racial divide.

Autobiography There is an obnoxious tendency among political candidates to frame their life story as a struggle against poverty or hard circumstances. As satirist Stephen Colbert once noted of presidential candidates, it is not enough to be an average millionaire. To appeal to populist instincts it becomes de rigueur to be descended from "goat turd farmers" in France.

Without dwelling on it, Obama reminds us that his father was black and his mother white, that he came from Kenya, but she came from Kansas: "I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slave and slave owners — an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles, and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible."

The word "story" is revealing one, for it is always the candidate's job (as both responsibility and ploy) to describe himself or herself as a character in a story of his or her own making. In speeches, as in homilies, stories almost always carry the weight of parable, with moral lessons to be drawn.

Most memorable, of course, is the story at the end of the speech — which is why it appears at the end. It is the story of Ashley Baia, a young, white, Obama volunteer from South Carolina, whose family was so poor she convinced her mother that her favorite meal was a mustard and relish sandwich. 

"Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue.  And finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. … He simply says to everyone in the room, 'I am here because of Ashley.'"

During most of the 20th century, demagogues, especially in the South, gained political traction by pitting working class whites and blacks against each other. How fitting, then, that Obama's story points in the opposite direction through an old black man who feels a young white woman's pain.  

CORRECTION : An earlier version of this post incorrectly attributed the phrase, "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union" to the Declaration of Independence.

Opinion | An unsettling look at Donald Trump’s social media rants

The former president’s social media audience has diminished since 2021, but his posts — mostly on Truth Social — have only gotten more disturbing

Shakespeare and the power of wordplay … featuring the pun that launched my career

Four words from Hamlet collide with multiple meanings and offer a stimulant for the brain as strong as the most sophisticated puzzle

Fact-checking Aaron Rodgers, who repeated Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s false claims about HIV/AIDS

Rodgers falsely claimed an antiretroviral drug called azidothymidine, or AZT, to treat HIV was ‘killing people’ in the 1980s

Press Foward’s first open call for funding focuses on historic inequalities

It includes $100,000 each in general operating support for more than 100 newsrooms

Opinion | Remembering Terry Anderson, AP reporter once held captive for 6 years

He had a long career, but he was most known for his horrific ordeal of being taken by Islamic militants while working in war-torn Lebanon in 1985

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.

• Analysis of a Speech

Barack Obama's Farewell Speech

Mannerofspeaking.

• January 11, 2017

Yesterday, 10 January 2017, President Barack Obama gave his farewell speech in Chicago. It is the end of an era.  Obama brought intelligence, dignity and character to the White House.

As the first black President, Obama broke a barrier that seemed impenetrable not so long ago. In so doing, he not only faced a significant amount of racial hostility, he also had to contend with several spurious accusations, including those about his place of birth and religion. It is less than encouraging that one of the biggest promoters of those lies will be the next President of the United States.

Obama assumed office at a time when America was embroiled in two wars and the world was in the depths of a devastating recession. Throughout his mandate, he faced relentless opposition from the Republicans on most of his initiatives. There is nothing wrong with healthy opposition to ideas, but on many occasions, that opposition seemed more personal than substantive; more vindictive than constructive.  To be sure, Obama was not a perfect President, but neither were his 43 predecessors. And his successor won’t be either.

Obama delivered his farewell speech to a partisan crowd in his adopted city, so there was little doubt that he would receive a warm response. T here were the expected references to the highlights of his Presidency and hopeful words about the US, but the overall tone was a cautionary one about the fragility of American. Whether Obama’s concerns for the future are founded or not, we will all find out soon enough.

The video of Obama’s speech is immediately below. Rather than analyze the speech as I often do by picking different parts for discussion, I have decided to give you the entire text. It follows the video. At various places, I have added my thoughts in [red] . Those comments refer to the text that comes immediately before.

Barack Obama – 10 January 2017

Hello Skybrook!

It’s good to be home!

Thank you, everybody!

Thank you so much, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

It’s good to be home.

We’re on live TV here, I’ve got to move.  [Humour.]

You can tell that I’m a lame duck, because nobody is following instructions.  [Self-deprecating humour.]

Everybody have a seat.

My fellow Americans, Michelle and I have been so touched by all the well-wishes that we’ve received over the past few weeks. But tonight it’s my turn to say thanks.

Whether we have seen eye-to-eye or rarely agreed at all, my conversations with you, the American people — in living rooms and in schools; at farms and on factory floors; at diners and on distant military outposts — those conversations are what have kept me honest and kept me inspired and kept me going. [Three rhetorical devices in one shot: anaphora ; polysyndeton ; and tricolon .]  And every day, I have learned from you. You made me a better president, and you made me a better man.  [Anaphora.]

So I first came to Chicago when I was in my early twenties, and I was still trying to figure out who I was; still searching for a purpose to my life. And it was a neighborhood not far from here where I began working with church groups in the shadows of closed steel mills.  [Builds ethos by mentioning early work and also shares a personal challenge (albeit briefly) of trying to decide what to do with his life. This creates empathy with the audience.]

It was on these streets where I witnessed the power of faith, and the quiet dignity of working people in the face of struggle and loss.

I can’t do that.  [Humour, in response to chants of “Four more years!” from the audience.]

Now this is where I learned that change only happens when ordinary people get involved, and they get engaged, and they come together to demand it.  [Polysyndeton and tricolon.]

After eight years as your president, I still believe that. And it’s not just my belief. It’s the beating heart of our American idea — our bold experiment in self-government.  [Two metaphors. Notice also the repetition of the “b” adjectives, “beating” and “bold”.]

It’s the conviction that we are all created equal, endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  [Consonance: “conviction” / “created”. Alliteration: “equal” / “endowed”.]

It’s the insistence that these rights, while self-evident, have never been self-executing; that We, the People, through the instrument of our democracy, can form a more perfect union.

What a radical idea, the great gift that our Founders gave to us. The freedom to chase our individual dreams through our sweat and toil and imagination — and the imperative to strive together as well, to achieve a common good, a greater good.  [ Epistrophe .]

For 240 years, our nation’s call to citizenship has given work and purpose to each new generation. It’s what led patriots to choose republic over tyranny, pioneers to trek west, slaves to brave that makeshift railroad to freedom.  [Tricolon.]

I t’s what pulled immigrants and refugees across oceans and the Rio Grande. [Nice parallel between two waves of immigration, one in the past, one in the present.]  It’s what pushed women to reach for the ballot. It’s what powered workers to organize. It’s why GIs gave their lives at Omaha Beach and Iwo Jima; Iraq and Afghanistan [Again, a nice parallel between history and the present.]  — and why men and women from Selma to Stonewall were prepared to give theirs as well.

So that’s what we mean when we say America is exceptional. Not that our nation has been flawless from the start, but that we have shown the capacity to change, and make life better for those who follow.

Yes, our progress has been uneven. The work of democracy has always been hard. It has been contentious. Sometimes it has been bloody. For every two steps forward, it often feels we take one step back. [Acknowledgement that he did not achieve all that he had hoped to. I think it would have been more effective had he been concrete about his shortcomings, especially given that he lists his achievements in the next paragraph below.]  But the long sweep of America has been defined by forward motion, a constant widening of our founding creed to embrace all, and not just some.

If I had told you eight years ago that America would reverse a great recession, reboot our auto industry, and unleash the longest stretch of job creation in our history — if I had told you that we would open up a new chapter with the Cuban people, shut down Iran’s nuclear weapons program without firing a shot, take out the mastermind of 9-11 — if I had told you that we would win marriage equality and secure the right to health insurance for another 20 million of our fellow citizens — if I had told you all that, you might have said our sights were set a little too high.  [Attempts to build ethos by listing achievements.]

But that’s what we did. That’s what you did. You were the change. [Gives credit to the American people.]  The answer to people’s hopes and, because of you, by almost every measure, America is a better, stronger place than it was when we started.

In 10 days the world will witness a hallmark of our democracy. No, no, no, no, no. The peaceful transfer of power from one freely-elected President to the next. I committed to President-Elect Trump that my administration would ensure the smoothest possible transition, just as President Bush did for me.  [Good that he cut off the audience’s boos about Trump by focusing on the importance of the peaceful transfer of power. It would have been good to hear him be a bit more conciliatory to / hopeful about Trump by —hard as that might be.]

Because it’s up to all of us to make sure our government can help us meet the many challenges we still face. We have what we need to do so. We have everything we need to meet those challenges. After all, we remain the wealthiest, most powerful, and most respected nation on earth.  [Tricolon.]

Our youth, our drive, our diversity and openness, our boundless capacity for risk and reinvention means that the future should be ours. But that potential will only be realized if our democracy works. Only if our politics better reflects the decency of our people. Only if all of us, regardless of party affiliation or particular interests help restore the sense of common purpose that we so badly need right now.  [Probably one of the most important parts of his speech. The United States is deeply divided and every day, Americans seem to be tearing each other apart a little more. This kind of rancour bodes ill for any nation.]

And that’s what I want to focus on tonight, the state of our democracy. Understand democracy does not require uniformity. [Good sound bite.]  Our founders argued, they quarreled, and eventually they compromised. They expected us to do the same. But they knew that democracy does require a basic sense of solidarity. The idea that, for all our outward differences, we’re all in this together, that we rise or fall as one.  [Again, the call to a common purpose.]

There have been moments throughout our history that threatened that solidarity. And the beginning of this century has been one of those times. A shrinking world, growing inequality, demographic change and the specter of terrorism. These forces haven’t just tested our security and our prosperity, but are testing our democracy as well. And how we meet these challenges to our democracy will determine our ability to educate our kids and create good jobs and protect our homeland.

In other words, it will determine our future. To begin with, our democracy won’t work without a sense that everyone has economic opportunity.  And the good news is that today the economy is growing again. Wages, incomes, home values and retirement accounts are all rising again. Poverty is falling again.

The wealthy are paying a fair share of taxes. Even as the stock market shatters records, the unemployment rate is near a 10-year low. The uninsured rate has never, ever been lower.

Health care costs are rising at the slowest rate in 50 years. [Perhaps, but they are still rising and it would have been nice to acknowledge this and stress the importance of brining them down.]  And I’ve said, and I mean it, if anyone can put together a plan that is demonstrably better than the improvements we’ve made to our health care system, that covers as many people at less cost, I will publicly support it.  [A nice challenge to those who are threatening to dismantle the  Affordable Care Act .]

Because that, after all, is why we serve. Not to score points or take credit. But to make people’s lives better.

But, for all the real progress that we’ve made, we know it’s not enough. Our economy doesn’t work as well or grow as fast when a few prosper at the expense of a growing middle class, and ladders for folks who want to get into the middle class.

That’s the economic argument. But stark inequality is also corrosive to our democratic idea. While the top 1 percent has amassed a bigger share of wealth and income, too many of our families in inner cities and in rural counties have been left behind.  [I cannot disagree with anything in this statement, but again, it would have good to acknowledge his administration’s specific shortcomings.]

The laid off factory worker, the waitress or health care worker who’s just barely getting by and struggling to pay the bills. Convinced that the game is fixed against them. That their government only serves the interest of the powerful. That’s a recipe for more cynicism and polarization in our politics. 

Now there’re no quick fixes to this long-term trend. I agree, our trade should be fair and not just free. But the next wave of economic dislocations won’t come from overseas. It will come from the relentless pace of automation that makes a lot of good middle class jobs obsolete.  [I was glad to see him mention automation. The technological revolution is going to create a lot of jobs, but it will also eliminate a lot of jobs. I recently read an article in the Los Angeles Times that discussed a distribution warehouse in California that, two years ago, had 1,100 employees but that, because of automation, today only has 500 employees.]

And so we’re going to have to forge a new social compact to guarantee all our kids the education they need.  [Yes, but we are also going to have to retrain people whose jobs disappear because of automation.]

To give workers the power  to unionize for better wages.  To update the social safety net to reflect the way we live now.  And make more reforms to the tax code so corporations and the individuals who reap the most from this new economy don’t avoid their obligations to the country that’s made their very success possible.  [Good that he gave some examples of what it will mean to “forge a new social compact” because that phrase alone is vague.]

We can argue about how to best achieve these goals. But we can’t be complacent about the goals themselves. For if we don’t create opportunity for all people, the disaffection and division that has stalled our progress will only sharpen in years to come.

There’s a second threat to our democracy. And this one is as old as our nation itself.

After my election there was talk of a post-racial America. And such a vision, however well intended, was never realistic. Race remains a potent  and often divisive force in our society.  [A sad reality but important to admit it.]

Now I’ve lived long enough to know that race relations are better than they were 10 or 20 or 30 years ago, no matter what some folks say.

You can see it not just in statistics. You see it in the attitudes of young Americans across the political spectrum. But we’re not where we need to be. And all of us have more work to do.

If every economic issue is framed as a struggle between a hardworking white middle class and an undeserving minority, then workers of all shades are going to be left fighting for scraps while the wealthy withdraw further into their private enclaves.  [Great line.]

If we’re unwilling to invest in the children of immigrants, just because they don’t look like us, we will diminish the prospects of our own children — because those brown kids will represent a larger and larger share of America’s workforce.

And we have shown that our economy doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. Last year, incomes rose for all races, all age groups, for men and for women.

So if we’re going to be serious about race going forward, we need to uphold laws against discrimination — in hiring and in housing and in education and in the criminal justice system.  [Polysydeton.]

That is what our Constitution and highest ideals require.

But laws alone won’t be enough. Hearts must change. It won’t change overnight. Social attitudes oftentimes take generations to change. But if our democracy is to work the way it should in this increasingly diverse nation, then each one of us need to try to heed the advice of a great character in American fiction, Atticus Finch, who said “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view, until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.”  [I found it a bit odd to quote Atticus Finch, as much as I love  To Kill a Mockingbird . Obama should have quoted the Cherokee tribe of Native Americans: “Don’t judge a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes.” He could have substituted “person” for “man”.]

For blacks and other minority groups, that means tying our own very real struggles for justice to the challenges that a lot of people in this country face. Not only the refugee or the immigrant or the rural poor or the transgender American, but also the middle-aged white guy who from the outside may seem like he’s got all the advantages, but has seen his world upended by economic, and cultural, and technological change.

We have to pay attention and listen.  [Important because many “middle-aged white guys” felt that Washington has ignored them and that is a big factor in the Democrats’ election loss.]

For white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and Jim Crow didn’t suddenly vanish in the ’60s; that when minority groups voice discontent, they’re not just engaging in reverse racism or practicing political correctness; when they wage peaceful protest, they’re not demanding special treatment, but the equal treatment that our founders promised.

For native-born Americans, it means reminding ourselves that the stereotypes about immigrants today were said, almost word for word, about the Irish, and Italians, and Poles, who it was said were going to destroy the fundamental character of America. And as it turned out, America wasn’t weakened by the presence of these newcomers; these newcomers embraced this nation’s creed, and this nation was strengthened.  [Very good to draw a parallel with the Irish, Italians and Poles who are now considered mainstream Americans.]

So regardless of the station we occupy; we all have to try harder; we all have to start with the premise that each of our fellow citizens loves this country just as much as we do; that they value hard work and family just like we do; that their children are just as curious and hopeful and worthy of love as our own.

And that’s not easy to do. For too many of us it’s become safer to retreat into our own bubbles, whether in our neighborhoods, or on college campuses, or places of worship, or especially our social media feeds, surrounded by people who look like us and share the same political outlook and never challenge our assumptions. In the rise of naked partisanship and increasing economic and regional stratification, the splintering of our media into a channel for every taste, all this makes this great sorting seem natural, even inevitable.

And increasingly we become so secure in our bubbles that we start accepting only information, whether it’s true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that is out there.  [Another important point. People are now living in their own echo chambers. The only time they come out is to rant on social media at people living in a different echo chamber. People need to be able to listen to, and think about, divergent points of view.]

And this trend represents a third threat to our democracy. Look, politics is a battle of ideas. That’s how our democracy was designed. In the course of a healthy debate, we prioritize different goals, and the different means of reaching them. But without some common baseline of facts, without a willingness to admit new information and concede that your opponent might be making a fair point, and that science and reason matter, then we’re going to keep talking past each other.  [Expanding the point above.]

And we’ll make common ground and compromise impossible. And isn’t that part of what so often makes politics dispiriting? [A sad reality.]  How can elected officials rage about deficits when we propose to spend money on pre-school for kids, but not when we’re cutting taxes for corporations?

How do we excuse ethical lapses in our own party, but pounce when the other party does the same thing? It’s not just dishonest, it’s selective sorting [Good alliteration.]  of the facts. It’s self-defeating because, as my mom used to tell me, reality has a way of catching up with you.  [Good quote from a personal source.]

Take the challenge of climate change. In just eight years we’ve halved our dependence on foreign oil, we’ve doubled our renewable energy, we’ve led the world to an agreement that (at) the promise to save this planet.

But without bolder action, our children won’t have time to debate the existence of climate change. They’ll be busy dealing with its effects. More environmental disasters, more economic disruptions, waves of climate refugees seeking sanctuary. [Tricolon.]  Now we can and should argue about the best approach to solve the problem. But to simply deny the problem not only betrays future generations, it betrays the essential spirit of this country, the essential spirit of innovation and practical problem-solving that guided our founders.  [Tricolon.]

It is that spirit — it is that spirit born of the enlightenment that made us an economic powerhouse. The spirit that took flight at Kitty Hawk and Cape Canaveral, the spirit that cures disease and put a computer in every pocket, it’s that spirit. A faith in reason and enterprise, and the primacy of right over might, that allowed us to resist the lure of fascism and tyranny during the Great Depression, that allowed us to build a post-World War II order with other democracies.

An order based not just on military power or national affiliations, but built on principles, the rule of law, human rights, freedom of religion and speech and assembly and an independent press.

That order is now being challenged. First by violent fanatics who claim to speak for Islam. More recently by autocrats in foreign capitals who see free markets in open democracies and civil society itself as a threat to their power.

The peril each poses to our democracy is more far reaching than a car bomb or a missile. They represent the fear of change. The fear of people who look or speak or pray differently. A contempt for the rule of law that holds leaders accountable. An intolerance of dissent [Consonance: “intolerance” / “dissent”.]  and free thought. A belief that the sword or the gun or the bomb or the propaganda machine is the ultimate arbiter of what’s true and what’s right.

Because of the extraordinary courage of our men and women in uniform. Because of our intelligence officers and law enforcement and diplomats who support our troops,  no foreign terrorist organization has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland these past eight years.

And although  Boston and Orlando and San Bernardino and Fort Hood remind us of how dangerous radicalization can be, our law enforcement agencies are more effective and vigilant than ever. We have taken out tens of thousands of terrorists, including Bin Laden.

The global coalition we’re leading against ISIL has taken out their leaders and taken away about half their territory. ISIL will be destroyed. And no one who threatens America will ever be safe.

And all who serve or have served — it has been the honor of my lifetime to be your commander-in-chief.  And we all owe you a deep debt of gratitude.

But, protecting our way of life, that’s not just the job of our military. Democracy can buckle when it gives into fear. So just as we as citizens must remain vigilant against external aggression, we must guard against a weakening of the values that make us who we are.  [Call to action and a thinly disguised plea to Americans to hold Donald Trump to account.]

And that’s why for the past eight years I’ve worked to put the fight against terrorism on a firmer legal footing. That’s why we’ve ended torture, worked to close Gitmo, reformed our laws governing surveillance to protect privacy and civil liberties.

That’s why I reject discrimination against Muslim Americans who are just as patriotic as we are. That’s why we cannot withdraw from big global fights to expand democracy and human rights and women’s rights and LGBT rights.

No matter how imperfect our efforts, no matter how expedient ignoring such values may seem, that’s part of defending America. For the fight against extremism and intolerance and sectarianism and chauvinism are of a piece with the fight against authoritarianism and nationalist aggression. If the scope of freedom and respect for the rule of law shrinks around the world, the likelihood of war within and between nations increases, and our own freedoms will eventually be threatened.

So let’s be vigilant, but not afraid. ISIL will try to kill innocent people. But they cannot defeat America unless we betray our Constitution and our principles in the fight.  [Call to action.]

Rivals like Russia or China cannot match our influence around the world — unless we give up what we stand for, and turn ourselves into just another big country that bullies smaller neighbors.

Which brings me to my final point — our democracy is threatened whenever we take it for granted.  All of us, regardless of party, should be throwing ourselves into the task of rebuilding our democratic institutions.

When voting rates in America are some of the lowest among advanced democracies, we should be making it easier, not harder, to vote.

When trust in our institutions is low, we should reduce the corrosive influence of money in our politics, and insist on the principles of transparency and ethics in public service. When Congress is dysfunctional, we should draw our districts to encourage politicians to cater to common sense and not rigid extremes.  [Important, but politicians have been saying the same thing for years.]

But remember, none of this happens on its own. All of this depends on our participation; on each of us accepting the responsibility of citizenship, regardless of which way the pendulum of power happens to be swinging.

Our Constitution is a remarkable, beautiful gift. But it’s really just a piece of parchment. [Nice contrast: from a beautiful gift to a piece of parchment.]  It has no power on its own. We, the people, give it power. We, the people, give it meaning — with our participation, and with the choices that we make and the alliances that we forge.

Whether or not we stand up for our freedoms. Whether or not we respect and enforce the rule of law, that’s up to us. America is no fragile thing. But the gains of our long journey to freedom are not assured.

In his own farewell address, George Washington wrote that self-government is the underpinning of our safety, prosperity, and liberty, but “from different causes and from different quarters much pains will be taken … to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth.”

And so we have to preserve this truth with “jealous anxiety;” that we should reject “the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the sacred ties” that make us one.  [Call to action.]

America, we weaken those ties when we allow our political dialogue to become so corrosive that people of good character aren’t even willing to enter into public service. [Sad but true.]  So course with rancor that Americans with whom we disagree are seen, not just as misguided, but as malevolent. We weaken those ties when we define some of us as more American than others.

When we write off the whole system as inevitably corrupt. And when we sit back and blame the leaders we elect without examining our own role in electing them.

It falls to each of us to be those anxious, jealous guardians of our democracy. Embrace the joyous task we have been given to continually try to improve this great nation of ours because, for all our outward differences, we in fact all share the same proud type, the most important office in a democracy, citizen.

Citizen. So, you see, that’s what our democracy demands. It needs you. Not just when there’s an election, not just when you own narrow interest is at stake, but over the full span of a lifetime. If you’re tired of arguing with strangers on the Internet, try talking with one of them in real life.  [Call to action.]

If something needs fixing, then lace up your shoes and do some organizing.  [Call to action.]

If you’re disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clip board, get some signatures, and run for office yourself.  [Call to action.]

Show up, dive in, stay at it. Sometimes you’ll win, sometimes you’ll lose. Presuming a reservoir in goodness, that can be a risk. And there will be times when the process will disappoint you. But for those of us fortunate enough to have been part of this one and to see it up close, let me tell you, it can energize and inspire. And more often than not, your faith in America and in Americans will be confirmed. Mine sure has been.

Over the course of these eight years, I’ve seen the hopeful faces of young graduates and our newest military officers. I have mourned with grieving families searching for answers, and found grace in a Charleston church. I’ve seen our scientists help a paralyzed man regain his sense of touch. I’ve seen Wounded Warriors who at points were given up for dead walk again.

I’ve seen our doctors and volunteers rebuild after earthquakes and stop pandemics in their tracks. I’ve seen the youngest of children remind us through their actions and through their generosity of our obligations to care for refugees or work for peace and, above all, to look out for each other. So that faith that I placed all those years ago, not far from here, in the power of ordinary Americans to bring about change, that faith has been rewarded in ways I could not have possibly imagined.

And I hope your faith has too. Some of you here tonight or watching at home, you were there with us in 2004 and 2008, 2012. Maybe you still can’t believe we pulled this whole thing off. Let me tell you, you’re not the only ones.

Michelle.  Michelle LaVaughn Robinson of the South Side. For  the past 25 years you have not only been my wife and mother of my children, you have been my best friend.

You took on a role you didn’t ask for. And you made it your own with grace and with grit and with style, and good humor.  You made the White House a place that belongs to everybody.  And a new generation sets its sights higher because it has you as a role model.

You have made me proud, and you have made the country proud.

Malia and Sasha,  under the strangest of circumstances you have become two amazing young women.  You are smart and you are beautiful. But more importantly, you are kind and you are thoughtful and you are full of passion.  And  you wore the burden of years in the spotlight so easily. Of all that I have done in my life, I am most proud to be your dad.

To Joe Biden,  the scrappy kid from Scranton  who became Delaware’s favorite son. You were the first decision I made as a nominee, and it was the best.

Not just because you have been a great vice president, but because in the bargain I gained a brother. And we love you and Jill like family. And your friendship has been one of the great joys of our lives.

To my remarkable staff, for eight years, and for some of you a whole lot more, I have drawn from your energy. And every day I try to reflect back what you displayed. Heart and character. And idealism. I’ve watched you grow up, get married, have kids, start incredible new journeys of your own.

Even when times got tough and frustrating, you never let Washington get the better of you. You guarded against cynicism. And the only thing that makes me prouder than all the good that we’ve done is the thought of all the amazing things that you are going to achieve from here.

And to all of you out there — every organizer who moved to an unfamiliar town, every kind family who welcomed them in, every volunteer who knocked on doors, every young person who cast a ballot for the first time, every American who lived and breathed the hard work of change — you are the best supporters and organizers anybody could ever hope for, and I will forever be grateful. Because you did change the world.  You did.

And that’s why I leave this stage tonight even more optimistic about this country than when we started. Because I know our work has not only helped so many Americans; it has inspired so many Americans — especially so many young people out there — to believe that you can make a difference; to hitch your wagon to something bigger than yourselves.

Let me tell you, this generation coming up — unselfish, altruistic, creative, patriotic — I’ve seen you in every corner of the country. You believe in a fair, and just, and inclusive America; you know that constant change has been America’s hallmark, that it’s not something to fear but something to embrace, you are willing to carry this hard work of democracy forward. You’ll soon outnumber any of us, and I believe as a result the future is in good hands.

My fellow Americans, it has been the honor of my life to serve you. I won’t stop; in fact, I will be right there with you, as a citizen, for all my remaining days. But for now, whether you are young or whether you’re young at heart, I do have one final ask of you as your president — the same thing I asked when you took a chance on me eight years ago.

I am asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about change — but in yours.

I am asking you to hold fast to that faith written into our founding documents; that idea whispered by slaves and abolitionists; that spirit sung by immigrants and homesteaders and those who marched for justice; that creed reaffirmed by those who planted flags from foreign battlefields to the surface of the moon; a creed at the core of every American whose story is not yet written:

Yes, we can.  [Callback to his famous election slogan.]

Yes, we did.  [Play on the slogan.]

Yes, we can.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God continue to bless the United States of America. Thank you.

Like this article?

Thanks John for posting the full speech here with your interesting comments. It was very useful for preparing my own rainbow review of the President’s speech.

Thank you for the comment, David. And thank you for sharing your rainbow review of the speech. Very interesting and I agree with you: there was little joy in the speech and much more focus on hope and vision, given Obama’s concern for what comes next.

Donald Trump’s inaugural address was the most ignorant and senseless group of words (if it can even be called that) I have heard in 70 years of my life! The man cannot speak properly at all; he can govern even less than he can speak! In the beginning I thought he would be a good president, but he turned to be what fish put of the freezer is after three days; a very undesirable piece of meat!

I don’t disagree.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Please enter an answer in digits: 4 × 3 =

Testimonials

John delivered a keynote address about the importance of public speaking to 80 senior members of Gore’s Medical Device Europe team at an important sales event. He was informative, engaging and inspirational. Everyone was motivated to improve their public speaking skills. Following his keynote, John has led public speaking workshops for Gore in Barcelona and Munich. He is an outstanding speaker who thinks carefully about the needs of his audience well before he steps on stage.

Karsta Goetze

TA Leader, Gore and Associates

I first got in touch with John while preparing to speak at TED Global about my work on ProtonMail. John helped me to sharpen the presentation and get on point faster, making the talk more focused and impactful. My speech was very well received, has since reached almost 1.8 million people and was successful in explaining a complex subject (email encryption) to a general audience.

CEO, Proton Technologies

John gave the opening keynote on the second day of our unit’s recent offsite in Geneva, addressing an audience of 100+ attendees with a wealth of tips and techniques to deliver powerful, memorable presentations. I applied some of these techniques the very next week in an internal presentation, and I’ve been asked to give that presentation again to senior management, which has NEVER happened before. John is one of the greatest speakers I know and I can recommend his services without reservation.

David Lindelöf

Senior Data Scientist, Expedia Group

After a morning of team building activities using improvisation as the conduit, John came on stage to close the staff event which was organised in Chamonix, France. His energy and presence were immediately felt by all the members of staff. The work put into the preparation of his speech was evident and by sharing some his own stories, he was able to conduct a closing inspirational speech which was relevant, powerful and impactful for all at IRU. The whole team left feeling engaged and motivated to tackle the 2019 objectives ahead. Thank you, John.

Umberto de Pretto

Secretary General, World Road Transport Organization

I was expecting a few speaking tips and tricks and a few fun exercises, but you went above and beyond – and sideways. You taught me to stand tall. You taught me to anchor myself. You taught me to breathe. You taught me to open up. You taught me to look people in the eye. You taught me to tell the truth. You taught me to walk a mile in someone else’s shoes. I got more than I bargained for in the best possible way.

Thuy Khoc-Bilon

World Cancer Day Campaign Manager, Union for International Cancer Control

John gave a brilliant presentation on public speaking during the UN EMERGE programme in Geneva (a two days workshop on leadership development for a group of female staff members working in the UN organizations in Geneva). His talk was inspirational and practical, thanks to the many techniques and tips he shared with the audience. His teaching can dramatically change our public speaking performance and enable us as presenters to have a real and powerful impact. Thank you, John, for your great contribution!

HR Specialist, World Health Organization

John is a genuine communication innovator. His seminars on gamification of public speaking learning and his interactive Rhetoric game at our conference set the tone for change and improvement in our organisation. The quality of his input, the impact he made with his audience and his effortlessly engaging style made it easy to get on board with his core messages and won over some delegates who were extremely skeptical as to the efficacy of games for learning. I simply cannot recommend him highly enough.

Thomas Scott

National Education Director, Association of Speakers Clubs UK

John joined our Global Sales Meeting in Segovia, Spain and we all participated in his "Improv(e) your Work!" session. I say “all” because it really was all interactive, participatory, learning and enjoyable. The session surprised everybody and was a fresh-air activity that brought a lot of self-reflection and insights to improve trust and confidence in each other inside our team. It´s all about communication and a good manner of speaking!"

General Manager Europe, Hayward Industries

Thank you very much for the excellent presentation skills session. The feedback I received was very positive. Everyone enjoyed the good mix of listening to your speech, co-developing a concrete take-away and the personal learning experience. We all feel more devoted to the task ahead, more able to succeed and an elevated team spirit. Delivering this in a short time, both in session and in preparation, is outstanding!

Henning Dehler

CFO European Dairy Supply Chain & Operations, Danone

Thanks to John’s excellent workshop, I have learned many important tips and techniques to become an effective public speaker. John is a fantastic speaker and teacher, with extensive knowledge of the field. His workshop was a great experience and has proven extremely useful for me in my professional and personal life.

Eric Thuillard

Senior Sales Manager, Sunrise Communications

John’s presentation skills training was a terrific investment of my time. I increased my skills in this important area and feel more comfortable when speaking to an audience. John provided the right mix between theory and practice.

Diego Brait

Director of the Jura Region, BKW Energie AG

Be BOLD. Those two words got stuck in my head and in the heads of all those ADP leaders and associates that had the privilege to see John on stage. He was our keynote speaker at our annual convention in Barcelona, and his message still remains! John puts his heart in every word. Few speakers are so credible, humble and yet super strong with large audiences!

Guadalupe Garcia

Senior Director and Talent Partner, ADP International

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Speech That Made Obama

By Mark Leibovich

• July 27, 2016

Twelve years ago, almost to the day, Barack Obama’s flight from Springfield, Ill., landed in Boston around 4 a.m. He paced around the lobby of the Back Bay Hilton, ran into his campaign press secretary, Robert Gibbs, and together they contemplated the keynote speech Obama would deliver to the Democratic National Convention the next night. Sleep was not in the immediate plan for Obama, who was then running to become the only African-American in the United States Senate. He would head out again at 6 a.m. to tape “Meet the Press,” “Face the Nation” and “Late Edition” on CNN. It was not the normal Sunday morning regimen for little-known state lawmakers.

But then, things had become aggressively abnormal for Obama since John Kerry had picked him to be the keynote speaker at his nominating convention. Obama figured this was a moment in time and that the fuss would subside soon enough. “I’m not someone who takes the hype that seriously,” Obama told me when I met him a few hours later.

He was making the rounds of a brunch hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus held aboard a docked cruise ship in Boston Harbor. I was assigned to write an article on Obama, then 42, that same day, and met up with him as he boarded the boat. Obama addressed me as “the guy from The Washington Post,” my employer at the time. He kept telling me, and the many people that kept rushing up to him, that he was desperate for a nap. I found this somewhat audacious and endearing. He seemed to have somewhere between eight and 12 seconds of political nicety in him for everyone before he would declare what he would rather be doing (“I need a nap”) and move on.

He was never a natural, draw-energy-from-the-crowd politician like Bill Clinton or even George W. Bush. When we could steal a few seconds, Obama kept emphasizing to me that this was all temporary, that the fuss would all end soon enough. He had some experience with riding small waves of national acclaim, after all, having been named the first African-American editor of The Harvard Law Review several years earlier. “After about two weeks, all the stories were written and everyone left me alone,” he said.

That, of course, never happened in this case. Normalcy would be an early casualty of what would come next for Obama, beginning with that 2004 keynote. It’s not really clear, in retrospect, whether Obama really believed he was a mere “flavor of the month, or the flavor of the week, or whatever,” as he told me; or whether he was deftly practicing the faux modesty required of a politician otherwise amply equipped with self regard.

But it’s hard not to look back on those flavor-of-the-month days in Boston as Obama prepares to make his last speech as a sitting president to the Democratic Convention. He could very well allude to that keynote from the lectern tonight, no doubt contrasting, as he likes to do, his black hair of then with the deep gray of now. He could very well invoke the unifying themes that he struck in what was the first national convention after 9/11. “There’s not a liberal America and a conservative America,” Obama said in one of that speech’s most quoted lines. “There’s the United States of America.”

The speech became a touchstone of national unity and a soaring manifesto of hope that would form the foundation of his 2008 presidential campaign. It would also represent, strikingly, the exact opposite tenor of Obama’s two terms in office. He is no longer a flavor of the month, and today’s flavor is a very different one of division.

Obama will stand on the convention podium tonight in the midst of a fractured, tense and violent time in America. The 2016 presidential campaign has served as a bizarre and awful corollary to a stretch that can seem frighteningly off the rails. Obama will make his address tonight a few hours after the Republican nominee, Donald Trump, said today in a rambling news conference that he hoped the Russians would hack into his opponent’s email to reveal the contents of Hillary Clinton’s missing emails.

In the perversity of this atmosphere, Democrats seem to be sensing a moment of bipartisan opportunity – a kind of backdoor unity campaign that could bring mainstream Republicans into their camp. The big speeches of Monday and Tuesday nights were both strikingly nonpartisan and included easy nods to the other side. Michelle Obama emphasized the shared imperative of picking a president best equipped to ensure better futures for children. “This November, when we go to the polls this is what we’re deciding,” she said. “Not Democrat or Republican, not left or right.” Bill Clinton last night quoted Newt Gingrich’s praise of his wife and also mentioned her past collaboration with another longtime Democratic boogeyman, Tom DeLay. It’s as if the Democrats are almost nostalgic for having normal, familiar Republican opponents and engaging in a retroactive normalization of past partisan norms. What a bizarre year.

And now comes Obama, in what many will see as a valedictory coda to his 2004 debut. It’s a big speech for Obama, no doubt. It feels bigger than the usual, even for an old gray pro that set out 12 years ago, thinking he could rest soon enough.

Mark Leibovich is the chief national correspondent for the magazine.

Explore The New York Times Magazine

A Playwright Reimagines America: In her new play, “Sally & Tom,” Suzan-Lori Parks brings exuberant provocation  to the gravest historical questions.

The New Mood Music: The Texan trio Khruangbin’s vibes  have spawned countless imitators, but their magic isn’t so easy to replicate.

Inside a Media-Fighting Law Firm: Tensions had been brewing for years inside Clare Locke, a top defamation law firm. Then came the biggest defamation case of them all : a case against Fox News.

Is Corporate America in Denial?: Despite Donald Trump’s populist promises , many bigwigs are keeping the faith that it couldn’t really happen here.

Larry David’s Rule Book: He’s a wild, monomaniacal jerk . He’s also our greatest interpreter of American manners since Emily Post.

Inside The National Enquirer : An ex-editor at the tabloid reveals the story of the notorious “catch and kill” campaign  that now stands at the heart of Donald Trump’s’s legal trial.

Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation

According to Aristotle, rhetoric involves identifying something persuasive in order to convince the audience. In his speech, Obama starts by making reference to Martin Luther King Jr. He highlights the important role Luther played in the fight for the liberation of the Black Americans. However, he says that the monument does not honor Martin Luther alone, but also other fallen heroes who took part in the struggle for democracy.

This is an important way to begin his speech because it shows that he values Martin Luther’s contribution to the struggle for democracy and that he is determined to continue defending the ideals and values that Martin Luther stood for. According to Aristotle’s argument, that the primary goal of rhetoric is to persuade and convince the audience, Obama succeeds in convincing his audience that he is determined to defend all the Americans regardless of their color.

In his speech, Obama highlights the changes that have taken place in America after the success of the struggle that was launched by Martin Luther King Jr and others. For instance, he says that Americans enjoy the freedom that was achieved through the efforts of Martin Luther King Jr. He says that if it were not for the struggle pioneered by Martin Luther King Jr, the US would not have been where it is today.

The speech is appealing since it uses abstract ideas to help the audience identify with various experiences. For instance, the symbolic mention of an earthquake and a hurricane at the beginning of the speech helps the audience to relate the message with things they already know.

Aristotle argues that there are three artistic types of appeals in rhetoric. They include pathos, logos, and ethos. Obama succeeds in using these appeals in his speech. Pathos involves moving the audience by concentrating on their emotional side. In his speech, Obama explains to the audience how Martin Luther King Jr sacrificed for the sake of the Black Americans who were suffering. His struggles brought about many changes that enabled them to enjoy freedom.

However, despite all the sacrifices that he made to fight for democracy and bring discrimination to an end, he was not appreciated by all the people. Eventually, he died a brutal death like somebody who had never fought for democracy. The audience must feel sympathy for a person who sacrifices his life to fight for democracy but never enjoys it himself. Obama, therefore, succeeds in appealing to the emotions of the audience.

According to Bitzer, the primary goal of rhetoric is to alter reality. He also argues that rhetoric is persuasive in nature, and when people speak to their audience, they intend to persuade them and eventually alter reality. In his speech, Obama persuades the audience to follow the teachings of Dr. Luther, who insisted on the importance of oneness. He persuades the audience to change their attitudes and try to understand the pain and suffering of other people.

He tells them that even if they live good lives, they should think about their neighbors who live in deplorable conditions. The fight against poverty should be a collective responsibility. By persuading the audience to change their attitudes towards their friends and neighbors, Obama tries to change the reality that the American people live in.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2021, February 21). Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation. https://studycorgi.com/obama-speech/

"Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation." StudyCorgi , 21 Feb. 2021, studycorgi.com/obama-speech/.

StudyCorgi . (2021) 'Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation'. 21 February.

1. StudyCorgi . "Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation." February 21, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/obama-speech/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation." February 21, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/obama-speech/.

StudyCorgi . 2021. "Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation." February 21, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/obama-speech/.

This paper, “Obama Speech: Rhetorical Analysis and Evaluation”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: March 14, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A critical discourse analysis of Obama’s speech on Bin Laden’s death

Related Papers

Carolina Mirallas , Natalia Rius

CDA looks at how members of social groups especially those with more power and access to the media discursively articulate their ideologies to serve their group's interests. SFL's view of language as a meaning making resource provides analytic tools that facilitate the unveiling of hidden ideological meanings. This paper analyses Barack Obama's speech after Osama Bin Laden was killed, and its aim is to describe the argumentative purpose behind lexico-grammatical choices and their ideological significance in Obama's speech. A combination of key notions of CDA (van Dijk, 2001) and SFL (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004) has been used. Some context-related concepts from SFL are used to describe social power and control of public discourse; while elements in Theme, Mood and Transitivity are quantified in a clause by clause analysis of Barack Obama's speech to determine how mind control (van Dijk, 2001) is linguistically exerted. The analysis indicates that the persuasive nature of the political speech is achieved linguistically though the realization of Textual meanings in thematisation of adjuncts of time, of Interpersonal meanings in modalization and polarazation of subjects, and of Experiential meanings in the frequent use of material processes logically organized in a chronological narrative. Key words: CDA; Obama’s political speech; social power and mind control.

muneera alaraifi

Jurnal Ilmiah LISKI (Lingkar Studi Komunikasi)

kais Kadhim

The main idea of this research is to analyse the English modals in Obama's speech semantically. The modal auxiliaries selected for analysis include (Will, Would, Can, Could, and Should). All the modal auxiliaries are interpreted based on the framework of Coates’ (1983) semantic clusters. The qualitative method of analysis is applied into this study. The modal auxiliary of ‘can’ signifying possibility functions to evoke positive emotions and connotations in the mind of all the listeners. It highlights the possibilities that are associated with people's hopes and wishes and reminds all citizens to look on the bright side, and the persuasion form is realized through the motivation on the Obama’s speech modal auxiliaries’ words. Keywords: Obama’s, Modality, Function, Speech, Public Speaking

Hamdi Hemada

In modern speech communication theory, rhetorics is defined as a verbal content of peoples' social life and as a source of communicative interaction (Hudson,1978;Volkov, 2001; Daletskiy, 2003). That is why political rhetorics is considered to be an instrument of government in the political system of any society. Rhetorics includes a great number of cultural and linguistic phenomena as a part of the process of social communication. Rhetorics presupposes a convincing speech effect produced on the addressee by the sender. The description of linguistic, stylistic and socio-pragmatic specific features typical of a politician's speech behavior helps define his/her main communicative strategies. These strategies promote establishing harmonious communication and communicative contacts between the political leaders, on the one hand, and the electorate, on the other hand. They help the politician seize his/her political power and positions. The analysis performed in our investigation results in the description of the linguistic means and communicative strategies typical of the political leader, Barack Obama.

Jana Chrenková

Tawos Mohammadi

The purpose of this study is to find out the important themes and the ideologies behind the linguistic features used in the speech of President Dr. Mohammad Ashraf Ghani, the president of Afghanistan. The speech was delivered to the joint meeting of the US Congress on 25 March 2015 in the United States of America. This speech is important because it has been delivered in a critical time when Afghanistan was passing through a critical phase of taking the responsibility of the war against terrorism from the international forces. The researcher has analyzed the introductory part of the speech through the three-dimensional approach of Fairclough. The analysis of the linguistic features indicated that the speaker was not only seeking to strengthen the existing relations but also trying to establish new economical, educational, and political ties with the US. The speaker has also tried to convince the audience (The US Congressmen and women) that the US in harmony with the world has to tak...

Namikaze Minato

Syahril Siddik

Language is produced intentionally by human beings for particular goals in communication. It functions as a means to seek for self-interest and it is related to power relations among people. They, therefore, use strategies and tactics to influence other people in order their goals can be realized. It is very interesting to investigate and analyze the ways Barack Obama as the presidential nomination from Democratic Party in the United States uses discursive tactics to influence the audiences. How does Barack Obama use Micro structural level strategies of discourse in his political speeches? What are the tactics on word structure used by Barack Obama? What are the tactics on phrasal structure used by Barack Obama? What are the tactics on expression or oral structure used by Barack Obama? What are the tactics on sentential structure used by Barack Obama? To answer the problems, the researcher adopts Critical Discourse Analysis introduced by Teun A. van Dijk about discourse structures a...

fitria herliana rahmayani

This study deals with the Speech Acts. The aim of this study is one type of speech to be analyzed using speech actsand to find out the frequency of each speech acts in the United States video’s speech entitled Barrack Obama’s. This study was conducted by using descriptive qualitative research. The data was be accepted from video script of Barrack Obama’s Speech. Documentary technique is used in collecting data. The findings showed that there are five types of words that will be found in the Barack Obama’s speech video script and there are representative, directive, declarative, expressive, and commisive. The initial type of speech acts is representative ( 34 words ), the second is directive ( 12 words ), the third isdeclarative ( 5 words ), the fourth expressive ( 4 words ), and the last is commisive ( 4 words ).

The persuasive strategies of public speaking . The selected corpus' ideological and persuasive components are assessed, thus revealing persuasive strategies.

RELATED PAPERS

Policy & Politics

Harriet Clarke

Bernard Douchin

Angela Xavier de Brito

Center For Embedded Network Sensing

Nithya Ramanathan

Teaching and Teacher Education

Mansoor Niaz

Purwana Saputra

Revue de l'histoire des religions

Sylvain Destephen

Journal of Biodiversity & Endangered Species

Ali El-Keblawy

Reza Abdul Kodir

Landgoed Bleijenbeek deel 1

Jan Nillesen

Transfusion

Robert Offner

https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR_Vol.9_Issue.10_Oct2022/IJRR-Abstract27.html

International Journal of Research & Review (IJRR)

Arjen P Versloot

Handbook of Materials Failure Analysis with Case Studies from the Chemicals, Concrete and Power Industries

Ricardo J Sanchez

BMC medical genetics

Maulik Shah

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Physiology

Dr Vanita Lal

Izabella Füzi

Ertugrul AYDIN

Scientific Reports

Dalia Pangonyte

njjfr hggtgrf

Cirujano general

Raul Gaxiola Werge

2020 5th International Conference on Innovative Technologies in Intelligent Systems and Industrial Applications (CITISIA)

Mostafa Habbal

Journal of Number Theory

YOUNGJU CHOIE

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis – Rhetorical Essay

Introduction, speech analysis.

The incumbent President Barack Obama was seeking re-election as the president of the United States of America for the next four years. He was facing Mitt Romney, a republican candidate, in the November 2012 polls. America’s first lady, Michelle Obama, in her speech at the Democrats National Convention (DNC), told of how her husband was passionate about leading the Americans to eventually achieve the “American dream”.

Michelle’s purpose was to introduce her husband as man who was more concerned about the common citizens’ concerns and who was willing and able to help everyone to realize his/her American dream because he himself had walked that path and knew the hardships and the challenges that each and everyone who seeks to succeed in America goes through.

This speech analysis answers the question of whether Michelle Obama was trying to advocate for her husband selling the real American dream to the audience at the Democratic National Convention or her claims and promises were unrealistic.

Barack Obama’s wife, the America’s first lady, gave a speech that showed the world the values that the president held dear. Michelle successfully used her husband’s background as well as hers to convince the congregants that the American dream was real, since her husband and she had walked that path and made it to the White House.

The first lady recounted of the childhood struggles that she and her husband had gone through to achieve what they gained so far. She revealed that only due to the students’ loan, they were able to graduate from the college. By mentioning that fact, she appealed to the majority of the youth facing the same struggle and unsure of their ability to complete college.

She was able to capture the emotions of the audience by stressing that success is not how much money one makes but how many people’s lives one touches. The audience was seen to be totally mesmerized by the success story she told and responded by several applauds and ululations.

The first lady was delivering that speech not only to the Democrats but also to all the Americans who were seeking for a better life. She told of her privilege to travel across the country due to which she met a lot of people who inspired her a lot.

She described the stories of the wounded soldiers willing not only to walk again but also run marathons, young Americans in Afghanistan ready to “do it all again” for America, teachers working without pay just for their love to children, and so on. In doing so, she managed to build her credibility with the audience.

She successfully used emotion as her main convincing force to win the hearts of the audience. She explained the hardships that her husband’s grandparents went through to ensure they would give a better life to their children, thus she again resonated with the American dream. Most of the audience was convinced that she was telling their stories despite the fact that she was the first lady living in the White House.

She insisted and reiterated that her most important title was not the first lady but the mother concerned about the welfare of her children. She was thus able to identify with the thousands of American women who were not the first ladies but mothers in order to make them relate to her story of care and worry about the future of their children.

She presented her husband as a person who after four years in the White House, did not change a little from the man she had married twenty three years ago. She spoke about Barack Obama as about the one who was caring for the less privileged. She explained that due to the same reason, the president signed the Lilly Ledbetter fair Pay Act, reduced taxes imposed on the working families and improved the economy through having created more jobs.

The first lady also used a tone to give hope to the audience. She used such phrases as “the people I meet inspire me” to create a sense of hope and a spirit of confidence in the America as a nation.

She was able to sell the idea that success comes from hard work and if America realized the much needed change, they would have to co-operate as a nation and work hard to eventually realize the change that they so yearned. Through such figures of speech, she was simply but indirectly asking the Americans to entrust the next four years of the America’s future to her husband since he had the best America’s interests at heart.

Even if many Americans or almost everyone in the world knew the story behind the success of president Barack Obama through his autobiography or even heresies, they were still willing to listen to the story narrated by Michelle Obama.

Michelle used the opportunity to present the story of her husband with a lot of emotions and facial expressions and managed to make a good number of audience shed tears of hope and joy. She avoided directly discrediting Mitt Romney though a critical analysis shows that she was contrasting two different backgrounds of two different Americans, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

Michelle successfully managed to hide political intentions in her speech until the culmination of her speech when she asked everyone to vote for Barack Obama who, according to her, had the best of America’s interests at his heart and was determined to improve the welfare of all the Americans.

At the end, she was able to convince majority of the audience that change does not happen overnight, but instead, it is a gradual happening that will eventually be seen and experienced by everyone. She, therefore, asked people to support her husband for the second time so that the Americans could eventually realize and witness what they had overwhelmingly voted for in 2008.

The first lady, in her speech at the Democratic National Convention, was able to present to the Americans and the whole world an image of Barack Obama as a trusted, caring, hardworking person worth being voted for to stay in the White House for another four year. She succeeded to resonate with majority of the Americans, particularly by mentioning the hard work that made America become a successful nation.

She convincingly proved to the audience that the American dream was still achievable and not only by the democrats but also the republicans and the rest of America. In conclusion, an appeal to the people to vote for Barack Obama was well presented as it becomes apparent as she won the hearts of many. The core purpose of her speech was to sell her husband’s candidacy but in an attractive and unique package that would appeal to the majority of Americans.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 28). Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –. https://ivypanda.com/essays/michelle-obama/

"Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –." IvyPanda , 28 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/michelle-obama/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –'. 28 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/michelle-obama/.

1. IvyPanda . "Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/michelle-obama/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Michelle Obama American Dream Speech Analysis –." October 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/michelle-obama/.

• First Presidential Debate: Mitt Romney and Barack Obama
• Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney on Health Care
• Barack Obama and Mitt Romney Comparison
• Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney’s Economic Plans
• Mitt Romney Softens Stance on Immigration
• Media Review on Mitt Romney's Wealth
• Government of United States of America
• On Guard, Mr. Opponent! Searching for the Logical Fallacies in October Debates. Obama vs. Romney
• Immigration Debate: Romney & Obama
• Michelle Obama’s Remarks on American Dream
• The Views on the Debate of President Obama and Romney on 10/3/12
• Public Speaking by American Politicians
• Influence of the American Media in Promotion of Democratic Values in the United States of America
• Political Reporting: the Readings of Garry Wills and Katherine Boo
• The Main Threat to the Modern Democracy