DOCSLIB.ORG

Civil Society and Civil Discourse: Eloquence and Hope in The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Civil Society and Civil Discourse: Eloquence and Hope in The CIVIL SOCIETY AND CIVIL DISCOURSE: ELOQUENCE AND HOPE IN THE COMMUNICATIONS OF PRESIDENTS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, AND BARACK OBAMA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIRMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE TEXAS WOMAN’S UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, SPEECH, AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES BY MARSHA DECKER B.A., M.A. DENTON, TEXAS May 2020 Copyright © 2020 by Marsha Decker DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my wonderful family. To my children, Kathrine and Tristan, who convinced me that it was never too late to go back to school. To my wonderful daughter-in-law, Qiong, who inspired me with her quiet grace as she completed her own Ph.D. And most of all, I would like to thank my amazing husband, Randy. Thank you for never losing faith in me and my abilities and for going above and beyond to help me make my dreams come true. Randy, you are my love, my rock, and my life, always and forever. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Brian Fehler, and my committee members, Dr. Phyllis Bridges and Dr. Graham Scott, for their guidance and support. Thank you, Dr. Fehler, for your enthusiasm for my topic and your never-ending patience with all of my emails. My deepest thanks to Tarleton State University’s Director of Composition, Dr. Kathleen Mollick for acting as my sounding board during all of our late afternoon coffee breaks. I could not have done this without your support. I would also like to thank Tarleton State University’s Dr. Mallory Young for encouraging me to pursue my doctorate. Thank you for believing in me even when I could not believe in myself. Thank you also to Dr. Jeanelle Barrett, the Department Head of English and Languages at Tarleton State University for your unwavering support and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Julie Chappell and Mr. Hank Jones for your moral support and for encouraging my love of all things Literature. I am forever indebted to Dr. Ben Sword for the countless hours spent in your office discussing the doctorial experience. Your support and willingness to share your own experiences with your Ph.D. studies was often a shining beacon in a world of darkness. iii Special thanks go to Mr. Paul Juhasz who started me on this path when you encouraged me to reach for the stars. I am forever grateful for your never-ending support and faith in me as a student and as an individual. Walking into your Freshman English Composition class so long ago, literally changed my life for the better. Last but by no means least, thank you to my colleagues and friends at Tarleton State University, North Central Texas College, and Cayuga Community College for their patience and understanding during the long journey towards my Doctorate. iv ABSTRACT MARSHA DECKER CIVIL SOCIETY AND CIVIL DISCOURSE: ELOQUENCE AND HOPE IN THE COMMUNICATIONS OF PRESIDENTS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, AND BARACK OBAMA MAY 2020 During times of difficulty, Americans traditionally turn towards the President for guidance and leadership. The trope of hope is a critical part of achieving these goals. Hope is the attitude of mind that is based on the expectation that something positive can happen in relation to one’s life, community, or the world at large. During times of crisis, hope can unite the population, encourage new possibilities, and effect change. Through the decades, presidential speeches have tended to posit an epideictic ideal: eloquent expressions meant to bring a diverse citizenry an ideal, if not reality, of unity. The American presidents Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Barack Obama each combined elements of taste, common sense, sympathy, propriety— and hope to posit an epideictic ideal: eloquent expressions meant to bring a diverse citizenry an ideal, if not reality, of unity. Each of these presidents’ style responded to the public values and political shifts of their time to encourage public trust and civil discourse. This study examines how civil discourse is essential to civil society and argues that a) United States presidents have practiced Stoic principles of rhetoric to unify the v American people, a practice that is understudied, and b) United States presidents have altered and extended those principles to allow room for appeals based on hope. The study situates presidential rhetoric within the larger context of classical rhetoric and Stoicism. This study analyzes several speeches from each of the selected presidents and draws upon PAC to show how these hopeful speeches have worked to evoke a sense of community and purpose for Americans. Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Obama combined the eloquence of clarity and coherence in speech, moral dignity in conduct of character and warmth of personality to advance their visions of civic unity during times of crisis. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION ............................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................v TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1 Background ........................................................................................................1 The Problem .......................................................................................................3 Scope ...................................................................................................................4 Method and Literature Review .........................................................................5 Chapter Outline ............................................................................................... 16 II. THE GREAT EMANCIPATOR: ABRAHAM LINCOLN ........................................ 19 Lincoln the Orator ........................................................................................... 20 Lincoln’s Background ...................................................................................... 24 Young Abe ............................................................................................ 24 Lincoln’s Education .............................................................................. 25 Lincoln the Lawyer ............................................................................... 28 Lincoln’s Historical and Political Context ...................................................... 30 Entry into Politics ................................................................................. 30 A House Divided ................................................................................... 32 Rising Tide ............................................................................................ 35 Rhetorical Analysis of Lincoln’s Speeches ...................................................... 37 Cooper Union Address ......................................................................... 38 First Inaugural Address ....................................................................... 45 Gettysburg Address .............................................................................. 51 Second Inaugural Address ................................................................... 56 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 65 III. THE NEW DEALER: FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT ................................. 67 vii Roosevelt the Orator ........................................................................................ 69 Roosevelt’s Background................................................................................... 74 Childhood.............................................................................................. 74 Education .............................................................................................. 75 Roosevelt’s Historical and Political Context ................................................... 78 Entry into Political Life ........................................................................ 78 FDR and Polio ...................................................................................... 81 The Great Depression ........................................................................... 83 Rhetorical Analysis of Roosevelt’s Speeches ................................................... 84 First Inaugural Address ....................................................................... 85 The Four Freedoms Speech .................................................................. 91 The Day of Infamy Speech ................................................................... 97 Conclusion .......................................................................................... 101 IV. YES WE CAN: BARACK OBAMA ..................................................................... 103 Obama the Orator .......................................................................................... 104 Obama’s Background .................................................................................... 112 Childhood...........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Constitutional Requirements for the Royal Morganatic Marriage
    The Constitutional Requirements for the Royal Morganatic Marriage Benoît Pelletier* This article examines the constitutional Cet article analyse les implications implications, for Canada and the other members of the constitutionnelles, pour le Canada et les autres pays Commonwealth, of a morganatic marriage in the membres du Commonwealth, d’un mariage British royal family. The Germanic concept of morganatique au sein de la famille royale britannique. “morganatic marriage” refers to a legal union between Le concept de «mariage morganatique», d’origine a man of royal birth and a woman of lower status, with germanique, renvoie à une union légale entre un the condition that the wife does not assume a royal title homme de descendance royale et une femme de statut and any children are excluded from their father’s rank inférieur, à condition que cette dernière n’acquière pas or hereditary property. un titre royal, ou encore qu’aucun enfant issu de cette For such a union to be celebrated in the royal union n’accède au rang du père ni n’hérite de ses biens. family, the parliament of the United Kingdom would Afin qu’un tel mariage puisse être célébré dans la have to enact legislation. If such a law had the effect of famille royale, une loi doit être adoptée par le denying any children access to the throne, the laws of parlement du Royaume-Uni. Or si une telle loi devait succession would be altered, and according to the effectivement interdire l’accès au trône aux enfants du second paragraph of the preamble to the Statute of couple, les règles de succession seraient modifiées et il Westminster, the assent of the Canadian parliament and serait nécessaire, en vertu du deuxième paragraphe du the parliaments of the Commonwealth that recognize préambule du Statut de Westminster, d’obtenir le Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state would be consentement du Canada et des autres pays qui required.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Affairs Record
    1996 January Volume No XLII No 1 1995 CONTENTS Foreign Affairs Record VOL XLII NO 1 January, 1996 CONTENTS BRAZIL Visit of His Excellency Dr. Fernando Henrique Cardoso, President of the Federative Republic of Brazil to India 1 External Affairs Minister of India called on President of the Federative Republic of Brazil 1 Prime Minister of India met the President of Brazil 2 CAMBODIA External Affairs Minister's visit to Cambodia 3 Visit to India by First Prime Minister of Cambodia 4 Visit of First Prime Minister of Cambodia H.R.H. Samdech Krom Preah 4 CANADA Visit of Canadian Prime Minister to India 5 Joint Statement 6 FRANCE Condolence Message from the President of India to President of France on the Passing away of the former President of France 7 Condolence Message from the Prime Minister of India to President of France on the Passing away of the Former President of France 7 INDIA Agreement signed between India and Pakistan on the Prohibition of attack against Nuclear Installations and facilities 8 Nomination of Dr. (Smt.) Najma Heptullah, Deputy Chairman, Rajya Sabha by UNDP to serve as a Distinguished Human Development Ambassador 8 Second Meeting of the India-Uganda Joint Committee 9 Visit of Secretary General of Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to India 10 IRAN Visit of Foreign Minister of Iran to India 10 LAOS External Affairs Minister's visit to Laos 11 NEPAL Visit of External Affairs Minister to Nepal 13 OFFICIAL SPOKESMAN'S STATEMENTS Discussion on Political and Economic Deve- lopments in the region
    [Show full text]
  • The Gordian Knot: Apartheid & the Unmaking of the Liberal World Order, 1960-1970
    THE GORDIAN KNOT: APARTHEID & THE UNMAKING OF THE LIBERAL WORLD ORDER, 1960-1970 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Ryan Irwin, B.A., M.A. History ***** The Ohio State University 2010 Dissertation Committee: Professor Peter Hahn Professor Robert McMahon Professor Kevin Boyle Professor Martha van Wyk © 2010 by Ryan Irwin All rights reserved. ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the apartheid debate from an international perspective. Positioned at the methodological intersection of intellectual and diplomatic history, it examines how, where, and why African nationalists, Afrikaner nationalists, and American liberals contested South Africa’s place in the global community in the 1960s. It uses this fight to explore the contradictions of international politics in the decade after second-wave decolonization. The apartheid debate was never at the center of global affairs in this period, but it rallied international opinions in ways that attached particular meanings to concepts of development, order, justice, and freedom. As such, the debate about South Africa provides a microcosm of the larger postcolonial moment, exposing the deep-seated differences between politicians and policymakers in the First and Third Worlds, as well as the paradoxical nature of change in the late twentieth century. This dissertation tells three interlocking stories. First, it charts the rise and fall of African nationalism. For a brief yet important moment in the early and mid-1960s, African nationalists felt genuinely that they could remake global norms in Africa’s image and abolish the ideology of white supremacy through U.N.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-South Korea Relations
    U.S.-South Korea Relations Mark E. Manyin, Coordinator Specialist in Asian Affairs Emma Chanlett-Avery Specialist in Asian Affairs Mary Beth D. Nikitin Specialist in Nonproliferation Brock R. Williams Analyst in International Trade and Finance Jonathan R. Corrado Research Associate May 23, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41481 U.S.-South Korea Relations Summary Overview South Korea (officially the Republic of Korea, or ROK) is one of the United States’ most important strategic and economic partners in Asia. Congressional interest in South Korea is driven by both security and trade interests. Since the early 1950s, the U.S.-ROK Mutual Defense Treaty commits the United States to help South Korea defend itself. Approximately 28,500 U.S. troops are based in the ROK, which is included under the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” Washington and Seoul cooperate in addressing the challenges posed by North Korea. The two countries’ economies are joined by the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). South Korea is the United States’ seventh-largest trading partner and the United States is South Korea’s second- largest trading partner. Between 2009 and the end of 2016, relations between the two countries arguably reached their most robust state in decades. Political changes in both countries in 2017, however, have generated uncertainty about the state of the relationship. Coordination of North Korea Policy Dealing with North Korea is the dominant strategic concern of the relationship. The Trump Administration appears to have raised North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs to a top U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • You Never Call. You Never Write. How Many Times Have You Thought About Your Friends from College, but Didn’T Have a Clue About How to Actually Reach Them!
    You never call. You never write. How many times have you thought about your friends from college, but didn’t have a clue about how to actually reach them! The NEW LU Alumni Online Community will help you get in touch. Log on today! www.lamar.edu/alumni Alumni Directory | e-mail an LU friend, update your personal data or post class notes. Groups | Reconnect with Greeks, organizations and affinity groups. News and Events | get the latest campus news and information on upcoming alumni and campus events. Career Networking | post or seek a resume, check out job postings from other alums, make business connections and mentor others. And Much More | Wallpapers and school song to personalize your desktop, message boards and chats! To register, follow the link to the Alumni Community for New User directions. Locate your user ID on the mailing label found on this page. NON-PROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE LAMAR UNIVERSITY PAID Member of The Texas State University System PERMIT NO. 54 BEAUMONT, TX 77710 P.O. Box 10011 Now is the time to invest Beaumont, TX 77710 in Lamar, invest in our students, invest in the future of Southeast Texas... CadenceCARDINAL VOL. 36 NO. 2 | OCTOBER 2008 Magazine Design: Mike Rhodes From the President Cover illustration: Eugene Anderson CARDINAL DEPARTMENTS Cadence 4 On campus 32 DreamBuilders 46 Class notes 64 Arts & Culture Greetings from Lamar University, The Staff Hurricane Ike dealt a heavy blow to Southeast Texas—in particular 30 Campaign impact 37 Athletics 57 Giving report Cardinal Cadence is published by the Division of University to our coastal communities—but restoration is moving ahead.
    [Show full text]
  • Academic Search Complete
    Academic Search Complete Pavadinimas Prenumerata nuo Prenumerata iki Metai nuo Metai iki 1 Technology times 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20140601 20210327 2 Organization Development Review 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20190101 3 PRESENCE: Virtual & Augmented Reality 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20180101 4 Television Week 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20030310 20090601 5 Virginia Declaration of Rights and Cardinal Bellarmine 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 6 U.S. News & World Report: The Report 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20200124 7 Education Journal Review 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20180101 8 BioCycle CONNECT 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20200108 9 High Power Computing 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20191001 10 Economic Review (Uzbekistan) 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20130801 11 Civil Disobedience 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 12 Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 13 IUP Journal of Environmental & Healthcare Law 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 14 View of the Revolution (Through Indian Eyes) 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 15 Narrative of Her Life: Mary Jemison 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 16 Follette's Platform of 1924 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 17 Dred Scott, Plaintiff in Error, v. John F. A. Sanford 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 18 U.S. News - The Civic Report 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20180928 20200117 19 Supreme Court Cases: The Twenty-first Century (2000 - Present) 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 20 Geophysical Report 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 21 Adult Literacy 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 2000 22 Report on In-Class Variables: Fall 1987 & Fall 1992 2021-04-01 2021-12-31 2000 23 Report of investigation : the Aldrich Ames espionage case / Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,2021-04-01 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Transitions: Issues Involving Outgoing and Incoming Administrations
    Order Code RL34722 Presidential Transitions: Issues Involving Outgoing and Incoming Administrations Updated November 25, 2008 L. Elaine Halchin Coordinator Government and Finance Division Presidential Transitions: Issues Involving Outgoing and Incoming Administrations Summary The smooth and orderly transfer of power can be a notable feature of presidential transitions, and a testament to the legitimacy and durability of the electoral and democratic processes. Yet, at the same time, a variety of events, decisions, and activities contribute to what some may characterize as the unfolding drama of a presidential transition. Interparty transitions in particular might be contentious. Using the various powers available, a sitting President might use the transition period to attempt to secure his legacy or effect policy changes. Some observers have suggested that, if the incumbent has lost the election, he might try to enact policies in the waning months of his presidency that would “tie his successor’s hands.” On the other hand, a President-elect, eager to establish his policy agenda and populate his Administration with his appointees, will be involved in a host of decisions and activities, some of which might modify or overturn the previous Administration’s actions or decisions. Both the incumbent and the newly elected President can act unilaterally, through executive orders, recess appointments, and appointments to positions that do not require Senate confirmation. Additionally, a President can appoint individuals to positions that require Senate confirmation, and a presidential administration can influence the pace and substance of agency rulemaking. The disposition of government records (including presidential records and vice presidential records), the practice of “burrowing in” (which involves the conversion of political appointees to career status in the civil service), and the granting of pardons are three activities associated largely with the outgoing President’s Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • Attack on Pearl Harbor
    Attack on Pearl Harbor From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Attack on Pearl Harbor Part of the Pacific Theater of World War II Photograph from a Japanese plane of Battleship Row at the beginning of the attack. The explosion in the center is a torpedo strike on the USS Oklahoma. Two attacking Japanese planes can be seen: one over the USS Neosho and one over the Naval Yard. Date December 7, 1941 Primarily Pearl Harbor, Hawaii Location Territory, U.S. Japanese major tactical victory U.S. declaration of war on the Result Empire of Japan. Germany and Italy declare war on the United States. Belligerents United States Empire of Japan Commanders and leaders Husband Kimmel Chuichi Nagumo Walter Short Isoroku Yamamoto Strength Mobile Unit: 8 battleships 6 aircraft carriers 8 cruisers 2 battleships 30 destroyers 2 heavy cruisers 4 submarines 1 light cruiser 1 USCG Cutter[nb 1] 9 destroyers 49 other ships[1] 8 tankers ~390 aircraft 23 fleet submarines 5 midget submarines 414 aircraft Casualties and losses 4 battleships sunk 3 battleships damaged 1 battleship grounded 4 midget submarines sunk 2 other ships sunk[nb 2] 1 midget submarine 3 cruisers damaged[nb 3] grounded 3 destroyers damaged 29 aircraft destroyed 3 other ships damaged 64 killed 188 aircraft destroyed 1 captured[6] 159[3] aircraft damaged 2,402 killed 1,247 wounded[4][5] Civilian casualties Between 48 - 68 killed[7][8] 35 wounded[4] [show] v t e Hawaiian Islands Campaign [show] v t e Pacific War The attack on Pearl Harbor[nb 4] was a surprise military strike conducted by the Imperial Japanese Navy against the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on the morning of December 7, 1941 (December 8 in Japan).
    [Show full text]
  • FDR and Pearl Harbor (Free Press, 2000), 258-260
    CONFRONT THE ISSUE Almost as soon as the attacks occurred, conspiracy theorists began claiming that President Roosevelt had FDR AND prior knowledge of the assault on Pearl Harbor. Others have claimed he tricked the Japanese into starting a war with the United States as a “back door” way to go to war with Japan’s ally, Nazi Germany. However, PEARL after nearly 65 years, no document or credible witness has been discovered that prove either claim. Most HARBOR scholars view Pearl Harbor as the consequence of missed clues, intelligence errors, and overconfidence. The causes behind the Japanese attack are complex and date back to the 1930s, when Japan undertook a military/colonial expansion in China—culminating in a full-scale invasion in 1937. America opposed this expansion and used a variety of methods to try to deter Japan. During the late 1930s, FDR began providing limited support to the Chinese government. In 1940, Roosevelt moved the Pacific fleet to the naval base at Pearl Harbor as a show of American power. He also attempted to address growing tensions with Japan through diplomacy. When Japan seized southern French Indo-China in July 1941, Roosevelt responded by freezing Japanese Scroll down to view assets in the United States and ending sales of oil to Japan. Japan’s military depended upon American oil. select documents Japan then had to decide between settling the crisis through diplomacy or by striking deep into Southeast from the FDR Library Asia to acquire alternative sources of oil, an action that was certain to meet American opposition. and excerpts from the historical debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Franklin D. Roosevelt
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1957 A Rhetorical Study of the Gubernatorial Speaking of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Paul Jordan Pennington Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Pennington, Paul Jordan, "A Rhetorical Study of the Gubernatorial Speaking of Franklin D. Roosevelt." (1957). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 222. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/222 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A RHETORICAL STUD* OP THE GUBERNATORIAL SPEAKING OP FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Meohanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Speech by Paul Jordan Pennington B. A., Henderson State Teachers College, 19U8 M. A., Oklahoma University, 1950 August, 1957 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer wishes to acknowledge the inspiration, guidance, and continuous supervision of Dr. Waldo W. Braden, Professor of Speech at Louisiana State University. As the writer1s major advisor, he has given generously of his time, his efforts, and his sound advice. Dr. Braden is in no way responsible for any errors or short-comings of this study, but his suggestions are largely responsible for any merits it may possess. Dr. C. M. Wise, Head of the Department of Speech, and Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of American Propaganda in World War II and the Vietnam War Connor Foley
    Bridgewater State University Virtual Commons - Bridgewater State University Honors Program Theses and Projects Undergraduate Honors Program 5-12-2015 An Analysis of American Propaganda in World War II and the Vietnam War Connor Foley Follow this and additional works at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/honors_proj Part of the Cultural History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Foley, Connor. (2015). An Analysis of American Propaganda in World War II and the Vietnam War. In BSU Honors Program Theses and Projects. Item 90. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/honors_proj/90 Copyright © 2015 Connor Foley This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. An Analysis of American Propaganda in World War II and the Vietnam War Connor Foley Submitted in Partial Completion of the Requirements for Commonwealth Honors in History Bridgewater State University May 12, 2015 Dr. Paul Rubinson, Thesis Director Dr. Leonid Heretz, Committee Member Dr. Thomas Nester, Committee Member Foley 1 Introduction The history of the United States is riddled with military engagements and warfare. From the inception of this country to the present day, the world knows the United States as a militaristic power. The 20th century was a particularly tumultuous time in which the United States participated in many military conflicts including World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Persian Gulf War, and several other smaller or unofficial engagements. The use of propaganda acts as a common thread that ties all these military actions together. Countries rely on propaganda during wartime for a variety of reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Famous Speeches: Franklin D. Roosevelt's Pearl Harbor Address by Original Speech from the Public Domain on 03.29.16 Word Count 578
    Famous Speeches: Franklin D. Roosevelt's Pearl Harbor Address By Original speech from the public domain on 03.29.16 Word Count 578 President Franklin D. Roosevelt delivers his "Day of Infamy" speech to Congress on Dec. 8, 1941. Behind him are Vice President Henry Wallace (left) and Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn. To the right, in uniform in front of Rayburn, is Roosevelt's son James, who escorted his father to the Capitol in Washington, D.C. Photo: U.S. National Archives/ Wikimedia Commons On Dec. 7, 1941, at around 1:30 p.m., Navy Secretary Frank Knox told President Franklin D. Roosevelt that Pearl Harbor, a U.S. military base in Hawaii, had been attacked and more than 2,400 Americans were killed. Previous to Pearl Harbor, a war with Japan seemed likely but the attack made it imminent. The next day, a somber Roosevelt delivered this speech to Congress and the nation. Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representatives: Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message.
    [Show full text]