On Tuesday night President Obama addressed the American public in the State of the Union address for his second time as president. Facing a divided government has always been a challenge for incumbent presidents, even when the Democratic party was the majority last year we heard grumbles from the other party (i.e. Joe Wilson "You Lie!"). However, the congress that gathered in the capitol on Tuesday carried a somber air grieving over the tragedy of the shootings of congress woman Gabby Giffords, and the people of Tucson. Obama observed a broken and divided America, and used his common message of unity and hope to address his course of action for the rest of his presidency. He conveyed the idea collective compromise by creating the structure of his speech for a divided audience in Congress, and appealing to the pathos of the audience of the American people by addressing them as "family members".
Obama opened by addressing his audience as a part of "the American family" this phrase appealed the ethos and pathos of his audience. The word "family" is familiar to all Americans and taps into both their hearts and their minds. A family has divisions, but overcomes them and continues for the betterment of the entire family, they grieve together, and work together. This underlying message of Obama's address was summarized in an opening sentence in the fourth paragraph of the speech. The established theme of compromise continues throughout the rest of his speech.
Obama shifted to business from his opening pathetic appeal, but the structure of his speech conveyed his message even when listeners became lost in the policy talk and numbers. An opinion column in the New York Times featured a conversation between columnists David Brooks and Gail Collins as they provided a review of Obama's State of the Union address. Brooks provided keen insight to the rhetorical structure of Obama's speech as he stated, "the three things that the president emphasized were all worthy, important policies that have significant bipartisan support...the really big tasks were mentioned but not emphasized". Brooks' analysis made me aware of why Obama's speech was so widely accepted across political lines. Brooks described it as "modest", but I would describe it as awareness of his network of interpretation. The president understood he was facing a divided congress and a divided America, and therefore emphasized the topics that few people could dispute.
I watched the State of the Union address with a room full of Penn State Democrats, Republicans, and even a few Tea Party members. As the president discussed research, education reform, and infrastructure spending, there were few scoffs or signs of disagreement. Because these are topics that few Americans disagree on. The lesser emphasized points of tax reform, immigration reform, and entitlement reform are topics that receive much more debate and were purposefully mentioned and moved away from. The rhetorical structure of Obama's speech structured around a divided congress, and his message was for a grieving and broken American public who could needed a message of hope and comfort from their "American Family".
