Cover not available
Part of
Political Argumentation in the United States: Historical and contemporary studies
David Zarefsky
[Argumentation in Context 7] 2014
► pp. 233–254

George W. Bush discovers rhetoric

September 20, 2001 and the U.S. response to terrorism

From the insight that Americans have an ambivalent attitude about rhetoric but demand it of the president in times of national crisis, the essay examines the response of President George W. Bush to the terrorist attacks of 2001, focusing especially on his speech to a joint session of Congress on September 20. The speech clearly reflects a definition of the situation as war, a choice Bush made immediately and instinctively. Several rhetorical moves are evident in the speech, including distinguishing the war on terrorism from other wars, marginalizing the enemy, forcing all nations to choose sides, minimizing the sacrifice required, and forecasting inevitable victory. The speech was successful in responding to the immediate situation, but it invited long-term risks, ranging from threatening civil liberties to encouraging copycat behavior by other nations and limiting the maneuvering room of the United States.

Published online: 24 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.7.12ch12
References
Apple, R.W. Jr
(2001) A clear message: I will not relent. New York Times, September 21, p. A1.Google Scholar
Broder, D.S
(2001). Echoes of Lincoln. Washington Post, September 25, p. B7.Google Scholar
Bruni, F
(2001) Bush, and his presidency, are transformed. New York Times, September 22, p. B2.Google Scholar
Brzezinski, Z
(2002) Confronting anti-American grievances. New York Times, September 1, sec. 4, p. 9.Google Scholar
Burke, K
(1966) Language as symbolic action. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bush’s remarks on U.S. military strikes in Afghanistan
(2001) New York Times, October 8, p. B6.Google Scholar
Cohen, R
(2001) Taking command. Washington Post, September 22, p. A9.Google Scholar
Edelman, M
(1964) The symbolic uses of politics. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
(1971) Politics as symbolic action. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
Farrell, T.B
(1993) Norms of rhetorical culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Greenstein, F.I
(2000) The presidential difference: Leadership style from FDR to Clinton. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, L.M
(1984) When dreams collide: Rhetorical trajectories in the assassination of President Kennedy. Quarterly journal of speech, 70:111–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hargrove, E.C
(1998) The president as leader: Appealing to the better angels of our nature. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Hoffman, S
(2002) America alone in the world. The American prospect,13:20. September 23.Google Scholar
“Islam is peace,” says president
(2001) Available at [URL] September 17. (Visited on November 13, 2002).
Kohn, R.H
(2001). A war like no other. Organization of American Historians newsletter, 29:4. November.Google Scholar
MacFarquhar, N
(2002) Egypt assails the lumping of U.S. war with Israel’s. New York Times, May 1, p. A11.Google Scholar
Max, D.T
(2001) The making of the speech. New York Times Magazine, October 7, pp. 32, 34–37.Google Scholar
McGrory, M
(2001) Leaders in the breach. Washington Post, September 13, p. A2.Google Scholar
McPherson, J.M
(1991) Abraham Lincoln and the second American revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, M.C
(2001) The Bush dyslexicon: Observations on a national disorder. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A
(2002) The perilous search for security at home. New York Times, July 28, sec. 4, p. 4.Google Scholar
Parry-Giles, T. & Parry-Giles, S
(2002) Presidential therapies and the events of September 11: Mimesis, methexis, and nationalism in the rhetorics of George W. Bush and The West Wing . Paper presented at the 8th biennial Public Address Conference, University of Georgia.
President Bush’s address on terrorism before a joint meeting of Congress
(2001) New York Times, September 21, p. B4.Google Scholar
President’s Remarks
(2001) New York Times, September 15, p. A6.Google Scholar
Safire, W
(2001) On language: Words at war. New York Times Magazine, September 30, p. 26.Google Scholar
Sanger, D.E
(2002) Hard choices for Bush. New York Times, April 1, p. A1.Google Scholar
Schmemann, S
(2002) After months of war, long fights still to wage. New York Times, May 26, sec. 4, p. 4.Google Scholar
Sciolino, E
(2001) Bush tells the military to “get ready”: Broader spy powers gaining support. New York Times, September 16, p. A1.Google Scholar
Seelye, K.Q. & Bumiller, E
(2001) Bush labels aerial terrorist attacks “acts of war.” New York Times, September 13, p. A16.Google Scholar
Sontag, S
(2002) Real battles and empty metaphors. New York Times, September 10, p. A31.Google Scholar
Starr, P
(2002) 9-11, One year later. The American Prospect, 13:2. September 23.Google Scholar
Stuckey, M.E
(1991) The president as interpreter-in-chief. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Transcript: Confronting Iraq threat “is crucial to winning war on terror.” (
2002) New York Times, October 8, p. A12.Google Scholar
Tulis, J.K
(1987) The rhetorical presidency. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Walzer, M
(2001) First, define the battlefield. New York Times, September 21, p. A27.Google Scholar
Witt, H
(2002) Terror war has U.S. in dubious alliances. Chicago Tribune, September 4, sec. 1, p. 1.Google Scholar
Zarefsky, D
(1998) Definitions. In Argument in a time of change: Definitions, frameworks, and critiques (J.F. Klumpp, Ed.), pp. 1–11. Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.Google Scholar