Bill Clinton Rhetorical Analysis In “I Misled the People” and “I Have Sinned” by Bill Clinton, the former president addresses his past affair with Monica Lewinsky and asks the country to forgive him for his lapse in judgement. Clinton delivered “I Misled the People” on August 17, 1998 on national television, and then a little less than a month later he spoke to a more intimate group of people at the annual White House Prayer Breakfast. Both speeches were meant to express his sincere apology for his mistake while one was directed towards the American people, and the other was directed towards a smaller group made up of family, friends, and staff members. In these speeches Clinton connects with his audiences emotionally by using analogies and humor, he builds credibility by using parallelism and religion, and uses both formal and informal diction to present facts about his relationships with both Monica Lewinsky and Hillary Clinton. Clinton emotionally connects with his audiences throughout both speeches by using analogies and humor.
Criticizing Bill Clinton Speech Essay “If a President of the United States ever lied to the American people he should resign” William J. Clinton,1974 Introduction: Critics should pay a very special attention to the Bill Clinton apology speech. The speech of the ex-president Bill Clinton was a bright example of how perfect rhetoric techniques might fail to deliver the message of a president to a mass audience if it goes about his morality. In his speech, Clinton, actually confesses he had a private relationship with Monica Lewinsky. It is a rule that such a confession and especially from a person of the highest position in the society means the end of the career. It took William Jefferson Clinton seven month to realize that people need apologies not for the deed, but for the lies.
Cassandra M. Guerrero O’ Kelly E.R.W.C. 4 October 2010 Senator Edward Kennedy Speech Edward Kennedy, senator of Massachusetts gave a speech on July 25th 1969 implying that he takes full responsibility for the crime he is charged with but explains that he suffered from a concussion. Kennedy explains him self and what happened that night but also provides times and witnesses as support. Edward Kennedy supports his actions by giving details about everything that happened that night including dates, explanations etc. Senator Kennedy gave his speech to explain what really happened the night of the tragic accident and why he decided on the actions he took in order to keep a good character by pleading guilty for leaving the scene of a crime and providing evidence that he had some injuries.
His example is a quote from Voltaire in which he criticized many people in his writing during his lifetime and therefore certainly believed in freedom of speech. His famous quote, “I wholly disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it…” is said with a sarcastic remark. He appeals to the reader's emotions, by explaining to them that they are not stepping up and defending their rights like they should be. Lippmann states that in a sarcastic tone to portray his claim which is that he disapproves that people are apathetic about their freedom. He explains that the true reason that freedoms should exist forcing agreement from the audience.
Wiesel being a Holocaust survivor, has credibility as well as emotional and logical evidence to support his argument on human indifference. By using this evidence in his argument he writes a moving and descriptive piece for his readers. Wiesel’s audience being the the President Clinton, Congress and the nation. He uses his credibility from his experience as a Holocaust victim to bring in the reader and inform them of what he has felt and seen about indifference in our world. The way he speaks of human indifference in the world makes it seem like the audience isn’t aware or just dosn’t care about the issue going on around us.
This pathos describes how Lincoln would care for his people and how he would put the task of helping the people suffering from the war first, serving as a strong pathos since it is not only emotionally affecting his people, but also encouraging and giving them hope. The war destroyed millions of families. Lincoln in the first place gave his attention on healing the people and their families, instead of describing how beautiful the future would be and giving unrealistic assumptions This pathos and ethos made people, no matter the North or the South, to feel that they are in unity. Both sides were suffering the same war and urged to end it, while they shared a same religion. God plays an important role to connect the people together, which enhances Lincoln’s credibility in his speech besides his position as a president and occasion of this speech.
The cartoon is a remembrance of the 2001 terrorist attack and to commemorate those who died. His cartoon is mocking and also criticizing the current political situation. The two political parties Democratic and Republican, and its’ presidential candidates bicker over everything and are in conflict with each other all the time. They are constantly blaming problems on the other party and criticizing members of the other party. But on the day of 9/11 remembrance, these two parties forgot about their divided opinions and there were no negative campaigns or advertisements against each other that day.
He also stated that all the stated in his speech challenges can be eradicated if everyone would work together. That is why he stated “We the people in order to for a more perfect union”. Senator Obama started to give a brief history to relate to his audience the rationale behind his thesis. This paved the way for the speech, because he highlighted a lot of grievances in his introduction that brought him to his thesis. The appeal to his logos is that he had been-----.
We see this now when a politician will amend his opponent, even though he has devastated him just previously, this is ethos. “Who is here so vile that will not love his country?” he asks. Who would say no? When our politicians began passing legislation after 9/11, a repeated strategy was to say that anyone who questioned the legislation was not patriotic, which is very similar to Brutus’s tactics, this is logos. This is how and why I believe Brutus delivered the more effective speech.
The pelican brief plot summary The pelican brief was a great book with many twists and turns. Two easy target Supreme Court justices are assassinated: liberal justice Rosenberg is assassinated at home while conservative justice Jensen is killed at a local inappropriate cinema. Meanwhile a theory of who did it cooked up by a law student at Tulane causes many problems for her and many others. The theory states that a wealthy oil tycoon killed the both of them because the justices saw eye to eye on only one topic, environmentalism. The tycoon wanted to drill in waters native to an endangered species, the pelican.