Analysis Blog #3

Both presidential addresses involve the aftermath of attacks on our nation. FDR’s speech addresses the attack on Pearl Harbor while George W. Bush’s speech addresses the attack on 9-11-01, five years later. The main differences between the two involve the time frame after each attack and when the addresses were given and the length of each address (according to the textbook).

The textbook seemed to comment on Bush’s address and not on FDR’s address. Many of those comments I completely disagree with. The textbook mentioned multiple uses of slanting in Bush’s address, such as seared, barbarity, and murdered. However, these words are, in fact, not forms of slanting. How is it not barbaric that these terrorists flew planes into buildings to kill people while committing suicide? How using the term “murdered” favor a bias and discredit alternative words? The 9-11 attacks were acts of murder, weren’t they? If this is true, then even the word “attacked” in FDR’s address should be considered slanting.

I also didn’t see many connotations in these addresses. A few examples the book gave in Bush’s address were the words “democracy” and “free elections.” Democracy is not an overtone, it is a form of government. Is chemistry an overtone as well? It’s a form of science, but the book would say it’s an overtone.

Overall, I felt that both presidential addresses were straight forward and to the point. Bush’s address had a lot more content, but that’s because there were 5 years of events to cover, whereas FDR only had a day of events to cover. They were addresses to Americans, so of course they’re going to give the American people the facts about acts of war rather than a bunch of politically correct nonsense.