Rhetorical Analysis: A More Perfect Union

In Barack Obama’s speech, “A More Perfect Union,” Obama made an effort to educate the American people on the history and importance of race in America. He explained how our nations founding fathers developed our Constitution based on the idea that all men are created equal, without actually practicing this idea themselves. He used the words of the Constitution to discuss the current racial issues and to state his concern of our imperfect nation. This was all in response to the very controversial remarks Barack Obama’s pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright had previously stated, which created much unease among Americans. Obama felt the need to address our nation about this specific problem, since he identifies as a black man himself, and offer a solution to end this built up anger and discrimination between the American people. In his speech, “A More Perfect Union,” Obama is able to clearly convey the specific racial problem at hand that created the exigency for this speech, as well as effectively share his own personal connection with this issue, in order to help fix our country and work together to find a beneficial solution.

The social problem is that some police overstep their boundaries as law enforcement and commit acts of unnecessary brutality towards citizens. The name of the article is “Sheriff: Lawyer Says Deputies Didn’t Need to Kill Texas Man” and was posted on abcnews.go.com on September 2, 2015. The scope of coverage and audience is at the national level.

In response to the controversial sermon given by his pastor and the racial remarks that followed him during his 2008 campaign, then Senator Barack Obama, was inherently forced into delivering a speech that would address the comments and prove to the American people that he did in fact shared their “American Dream” and was not an Anti-America charity case. Obama gave his famous “A More Perfect Union” speech in Philadelphia, where he seized the opportunity to address the controversy as an indication of a much larger issue, race relations in America and introduce his mission of moving the country toward “a more perfect union.” His speech often coined, “the Race Speech”, had several factors play into its success, one factor being the way the speech was delivered, his speech incorporated the jeremiad form and constitutive form of rhetoric, the use of those two forms helped Obama address the issue while at the same time creating an identity that would encompass all Americans who would then come together in this identity and work toward the solution of the race issue and providing the “American Dream” for everyone.

In Obama’s speech “A More Perfect Union”, he emphasizes the importance of unity among Americans. He wants people to overlook their ethnic backgrounds and join together as one. This speech brought out many points that Americans should take into consideration. That even though we are all from different backgrounds, we should overlook our differences to make us a stronger nation. Obama’s speech was inspiring in some aspects, but in a way his speech also is controversial.

“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union”1 - On March the 18th 2008 Barack Obama opened his speech on race, in Philadelphia, with this sentence. From the open sentence you can see that this speech isn’t any speech, perform by any orator. It’s a speech with a main message, performed for the people, to creates a brighter future for all the American people and to change history.

Persuasion is a skill that can be acquired and utilized with a mastery of writing. Arguing against the popular belief is one of the most difficult things that one can do. The following essay rhetorically analyzes an article that is written about why the legal drinking age should stay at 21 years old in the United States. The author of the article attempts to argue against the popular opinion that the drinking age should be lowered and is successful by using appeals to one’s logos. The author is an experienced writer and knows how to convey their ideas to convince people of his argument. Understanding why someone is writing a piece, what their motivation is, and how they try to convince the reader of their argument helps gain a more comprehensive grasp of what the subject matter itself is. Personally, I look to argue against popular opinions because it enables me to critically think of a sound argument that can not easily be disputed. This essay helped me

In May of 1998, Kipland Kinkel brought a gun to his school. Over the course of two days this escalated from: being sent home, to murdering his father and mother, to murdering 2 students and wounding 26, earning a lifetime sentence of 111 years and 8 months in prison. In the court case being examined, the presiding judge addresses the original case, defendants ground for appeal, and the justification for the State’s decision to deny the appeal. Judge Haselton effectively uses ethos, logos, and pathos to support the Higher Court’s decision to deny the appeal because the original sentence was constitutional and just.

In response to Geoffrey Shepherd's article “It’s clear the US should not have bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki”. Shepard tries to pull us into his claim by using pathos, logos, and ethos. He uses estimates of 500,000 Japanese soldiers died from the atomic bomb. Then Geoffrey begins to state that we had an alternative spot to drop the bombs, the alternate spot we could’ve dropped the bomb would have been Tokyo Bay. It was idle and estimated that less lives would’ve been taken and would showed more of a threat to the Japanese leaders.

From two perspectives, we see a world plagued by the ignoble aspects of human nature. Through one set of eyes we are shown the global ecosystem imitating the opening motions of a mass extinction, through another we see the inevitable and hellish effects of culturalized greed. In both cases we are treated to the observations of an aggrieved observer, but the means by which these observers show us their perspective on the world are by no means identical. Here we will explore the strategies, expressions, argumentations, and appeals of two authors with intertwining stories to tell.

The United States, as many believe, is the land of opportunity, however, when looking at individual states, towns, and cities, this popular slogan may seem false to some. Within each state, all schools, such as middle and high schools, may not receive or offer equity. In an effort to revel inequalities within school systems, I will discuss the differences between schools in my town, the apparent lack of public concern about schooling inequality, and what changes could be made in an effort to reduce schooling inequality.

Do you believe that the U.S. needs to be more “united” to be able to become better as a country? Former president, Barack Obama does. “A More Perfect Union” is the name of a speech given by Barack Obama in 2008 for his presidential campaign. In his speech, Obama builds an argument on how United States citizens must come together and look past racial and ethnical differences in order to better our country. Throughout his speech, Obama states various reasons to support his argument. Some of the many reasons include: the problem of recurring racism, the fight and work of getting equal rights from generations before, and the need to come together to be able to face certain problems. Along with these reasons, Barack Obama also uses many

The strongest of Obama’s points reside in his use of pathos, or emotional appeal, to connect with his audience. The audience and appeal are blatant from the beginning of the essay to the final word. Americans. Due to the loss of American lives, the emotional charge within the audience is almost palpable. Obama highlights this when he states:

As technologies have advanced to make performing day-to-day tasks easier many have become divided on if technology is helping or hurting society. Many have taken to writing to state their polar stances on the issue. This includes Eric Weiner who wrote “The Cost of Saying Yes to Convenience” and David Cain who wrote “The Danger of Convenience”. They both have similar stances on the issue however present their arguments in different ways. “The Cost of Saying Yes to Convenience” by Eric Weiner is a more effective essay than “The Danger of Convenience” by Eric Weiner because it has a good balance of rhetorical appeals, strong diction, and is organized well which allows the reader to clearly understand it.

He acknowledges that the resentments of the black and white communities “aren’t always expressed in polite company,” but these resentments are manifested within our society in destructive ways, like racism (Obama, par. 31). The audience feels that he is knowledgeable and credible on the immediate topics affecting our future and our daily lives.

Senator Barack Obama had many issues throughout his campaign. Obama’s speech, “A More Perfect Union”, delivered on March 18, 2008, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, conveyed many issues concerning racism throughout the United States, but it starts out stating how the founders of this nation constructed the Declaration of Independence, creating all men equal. Obama then begins to talk about his pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and his racial remarks against America and Israel, as it is “divisive at a time when we need unity”, referring to the “ two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis” going on at the time. (Obama 2) Obama remarks “I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas,” (Obama 1) because there is much criticism in his campaign due to his race. Obama argues that race is paralyzing our nation, and that it is still a major issue due to white privilege, and racial inequality. In the end, Obama hopes to move past the “racial stalemate we’ve been stuck in for years,” (Obama 6) and wishes to improve health care, jobs, schools, and other social issues for the United States.