Deliberative Dilemma

Major Presidential speeches, or announcements, provide plenty of material for rhetorical analysis. President Obama's announcement that "combat operations in Iraq" have ended is no exception. As such, we might focus on many areas - the symbolism of the location, certain word choices - for instance, while "combat operations" have ended, military engagements - street fights and gun battles - have not. So we might focus on issues of definition. There are, of course, many others.

But one that seems to have escaped most commentators is what I'll call the "deliberative dilemma." According to Aristotle, there are three core issues - blame, values, or choice. They're known as forensic (who did it), epideictic - demonstrative (what good is it), and deliberative (what should we do). Later rhetoricians developed this into stasis theory, adding two other places of argument, cause and definition.

Good rhetoric, or powerful rhetoric, may combine all three issues, but one predominates. JFK's speech declaring the U.S. will put a man on the moon is deliberative. Eisenhower's farewell address is best known for its forensic assessment of the military-industrial complex. But we may argue that the deliberative forms the heart of any presidential address. I say this because the president represents the country as a whole. While the president cannot be divorced from his party or its politics, he still stands and speaks for the country as a whole. (Whether this makes him a metonymy, a synechdoche, or both, is a subject for another essay.)

The purpose of a presidential speech, then, is to bring the country together, to define our values, to express ideas that unite us and voice sentiments that motivate us. In short, the president is both cheerleader and sermonizer in chief. Before and after the speech his words are analyzed and criticized, but much of that criticism turns on how well he demonstrated the group's values - whether a sub-group of the country, or the country as a group of the whole.

This brings us to President Obama's deliberative dilemma of August 31, 2010. Let's start by focusing on the criticism: those on the left complained that Obama did not discuss the causes of the Iraq War, that he did not blame Bush and Cheney for the misinformation and lies that led us into the war, nor did he deal with the consequences in any detail. (Rachel Maddow provides a wonderful summary of the changing rationale.) Those on the right were upset that Obama did not give Bush enough credit for what they see as a positive outcome or noble motives; many mentioned specifically the "Surge," as if that was a battle that guaranteed victory.

We may call that forensic divide "fact 1" (with a nod to Sherlock Holmes). (Notice that both sides have focused on the blame/credit question.)

Fact 2: It is an election year, and the politics of Iraq have a direct impact on the politics of the economy, which will probably have a direct impact on the election, which will in turn affect President Obama's agenda and ability to lead.

Fact 3: The Iraq war not only divides the country, as did, say the Vietnam war, it also serves as a flashpoint for deep-seated and conflicting ideologies. These ideologies spring from core values, values that answer questions like, what is the nature of the country; what is our role in the world; who are our enemies, why are they our enemies, and how do we fight them. These values - beliefs, really - are almost intransigent and practically unarguable.

Fact 4: Barack Obama favors rhetorical, political and intellectual balance. It's visible in his style, his vision, and his speeches. Consider some phrases from his famous, and powerful, "More Perfect Union" speech: "Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots" "through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience" and finally, perhaps the best known line: "I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas."

Fact 5: Barack Obama opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. His most vocal supporters vehemently loathe it. But summarily pulling out carries political consequences, at home and abroad. Further, independents are the most important segment of the electorate. Going back to Fact 2, Obama must be aware of his audience, and his rhetorical goal. His rhetorical goal is not simply to announce that the "combat troops" are leaving Iraq, and that in a little more than a year all troops will be out of Iraq. Nor is his rhetorical goal forensic - dealing with the "elephant in the room" - the blame (or credit) for the Iraq War. He leaves that to the analysts.

Rather, his rhetorical goal is to focus on the issues - or issue - that will define the election and to demonstrate his competence in handling it: "
Our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work." So he wants to - or must - use the rhetorical moment - the Kairos of the "end of our combat mission in Iraq" - to define the issues and enhance his ethos (reinforce his credibility).

Ah, but enhance his ethos with who? Certainly not with the say-nothing, do-nothing (know-nothing) Republicans who have opposed every attempt at conversation. Nor with the Democratic party, although he must be careful with the progressives. He must present himself as favoring their views, but constrained by politics (or "reality") into modifying actions. (This becomes clearer if we understand the nature of audience - again, a subject for another essay).

Rather, his audience, the one he needs to persuade, are the independents - the middle balancers. And for them, the demonstrative must yield to the deliberative - where are we going and why.

Hence the acknowledgment of the past that frustrated his supporters and gave umbrage to his opponents. Obama stands balanced and those without a political stake - the independents - will see him, hopefully, as deliberative and full of phronesis, or practical wisdom.

And hence, the "theme" of the speech: "It is time to turn the page."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/31/remarks-president-address-nation-end-combat-operations-iraq