COLUMN 3: picking apart the rhetoric
In recent news, President Obama has asked a new favor of Congress. He has pleaded our representatives to fight the war for the Americans living and the soldiers dying; to fight for the heroic values the United States of America embodies while putting down the controversy that is the Islamic State. In this instance, many would be fooled into believing these statements, because that is all that they are, but in Eugene Robinson's new piece he gets readers to question. To question what side of his mouth Obama is talking out of and with what precise plan he has established to transform his talk into action? Racing toward this goal, Robinson employs rhetorical devices to help him prove his point. Such strategy, like his diction, his sentence organization, and his appeals to the classical pathos, ethos, and logos trio, all argue one man's thoughts in a tone and voice that just happens to perfectly humanize the columnist ( after all he has been at this long enough to know how to play the game of politics). In specific, Robinson utilizes high formal diction at some points, creating a naturally educated tone, while giving other climaxes in his writing more simple straightforward words, at which times readers get a more casual vibe, conversational even, to listen to the governmental babble. Robinson, in using direct quotes from the President as well as other reputable sources, also lays a foundation of logic to base his opinion on- the heart of the article. He defines terms, such as "Jihadistan" and "Andar Awakening" to credit his background in the field and give readers insight to the world of politics they can only read about. Continuing the laid back tone, he creates similes such as relating "ungoverned spaces" to "petri dishes" to make it reader friendly, and encourages looking at things in different perspectives, mostly his perspective. But ( also one of his favorite transitions because Robinson always presents both sides of the coin) these strategies give this op-ed article a contradictory, biting intrigue while making politics relevant to a wide audience.