ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversity TheGraduateSchool CapitalCollege WITHOUTMINCINGWORDS:PRESIDENTIALRHETORICINTHELATE COLDWARERA,1977-1992 ADissertationin AmericanStudies by MaryE.Clater ©2012MaryE.Clater SubmittedinPartialFulfillment oftheRequirements fortheDegreeof DoctorofPhilosophy August2012 ii ThedissertationofMaryE.Claterwasreviewedandapproved*bythefollowing: CharlesD.Kupfer AssociateProfessorofAmericanStudiesandHistory DissertationAdviser ChairofCommittee JohnR.Haddad AssociateProfessorAmericanStudiesandPopularCulture HaroldB.Shill ProfessorofPoliticalScience AnneA.Verplanck AssociateProfessorofAmericanStudiesandHeritageStudies DavidS.Witwer AssociateProfessorofAmericanStudiesandHistory SimonJ.Bronner DistinguishedProfessorofAmericanStudiesandFolklore ProgramDirector,DoctorofPhilosophyinAmericanStudies *SignaturesareonfileintheGraduateSchool. iii Abstract ThisdissertationexaminespresidentialrhetoricduringthelastColdWarera(1977- 1992)throughaninterdisciplinarylens.Byhighlightingonepieceofrhetoricfromeachof Carter’s,Reagan’s,andBush’sadministrationonthreerelatedtopicsand/orthemes,this workrevealsthenecessityofpoliticalandrhetoricalpragmatisminpreparinganddelivering publicrhetoric.AllthreePresidentspossessedauniquepersona,ideology,andspeaking style.However,worldeventsnecessitatedthatsuchcharacteristicsbesubservienttothe needsofthemoment. Eachsectioncentersaroundaselectedtopicthathadfar-rangingimplicationsforthe era–VisionforAmerica,PerspectivesofCommunism,andViewsoftheBerlinWall.Each sectionisthendividedintothreechapters,oneforeachPresident’sspeechonthattopic,and providesanintegratedcomparativeanalysisofhowthespeech’srelatedtoeachother.Each chapterfocusesuponthepolitical,historical,andrhetoricaldebatessurroundingthespeech’s development,providesaculturally-basedrhetoricalanalysisofthespeechasitwasdelivered, andanalyzesthemedia’sandpublic’simmediateresponsetothespeech.Utilizingthis approachenablesthisdissertationtoexaminepresidentialrhetoricfromanewperspective whilerevealingimportantprimarysourceinformationfromCarter’s,Reagan’s,andBush’s presidentiallibraries. iv TableofContents INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………… 1 Argument ……………………………………………………………… 1 Approach ……………………………………………………………… 4 LiteratureReview………………………………………………………. 14 Methodology……………………………………………………………. 18 Section1:VISIONFORAMERICA ………………………………………….. 23 Chapter1:Carter:InauguralAddress………………………………….. 25 Chapter2:Reagan:InauguralAddress…………………………………. 54 Chapter3:Bush:InauguralAddress…………………………………… 84 ConcludingComparisons………………………………………………. 118 Section2:PERSPECTIVESOFCOMMUNISM……………………………… 126 Chapter1:Carter:1980StateoftheUnionAddress…………………… 131 Chapter2:Reagan:EvilEmpireSpeech……………………………….. 175 Chapter3:Bush:BeyondContainmentCommencementAddress……... 206 ConcludingComparisons………………………………………………. 250 Section3:VIEWSOFTHEBERLINWALL…………………………………. 254 Chapter1:Carter:TownHallMeeting………………………………… 257 Chapter2:Reagan:BrandenburgGateSpeech………………………… 280 Chapter3:Bush:AFL-CIOSpeech……………………………………. 310 ConcludingComparisons………………………………………………. 352 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………… 357 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………… 360 v Acknowledgements Ibelievethatthepeoplebroughtintoone’slifearethereforapurpose.This dissertationisalivingtestamenttothatconviction. HeartfeltthanksgoestothecuratorialandresearchroomstaffattheJimmyCarter PresidentialLibrary,theGeorgeBushPresidentialLibrary,andtheRonaldReagan PresidentialLibraryforretrievingthemanycartsofarchivalmaterialIrequestedand answeringmynumerousquestions.Inparticular,IwanttoextendmyappreciationtoDr. McKenzieMorseattheBushPresidentialLibraryforhelpingmelocatethenecessaryfiles andRayWilsonattheReaganPresidentialLibraryfortrackingmedowninthemiddleofthe museumtotellmethathehadfoundanotherboxofKenKhachigian’spapersthatIshould examine.IamalsogratefultotheStudentActivitiesFundatPennStateHarrisburgfor providingmuchneededfundingtowardsmyresearchtriptotheBushPresidentialLibrary. Ioweagreatdebtofgratitudetomydissertationcommitteewhodevotedhoursoutof theirbusyschedulestoreadandeditthisproject:Dr.CharlesKupfer(chair),Dr.John Haddad,Dr.HaroldShill,Dr.AnneVerplanck,andDr.DavidWitwer.Theirthoughtfuland challengingcritiqueshavemademeabetterscholar.Icouldnothaveaskedforabetter committee.AspecialthanksgoestoDr.JohnHaddadwhoseclassinspiredthefirst componentofthisdissertationandwhoencouragedmetodelvedeeperintothesubjectand methodology.Also,Icouldnothavecompletedthisworkwithouttheencouragement, mentoring,andguidanceofDr.CharlesKupfer,whofirsttookmeunderhiswingasa master’sstudent. Finally,tomyparents,Ioffermysincereappreciationforenduringstacksofbooks andpapersaroundthehouse,lastminuteresearchtrips,andlate-nightwriting.Iloveyou! 1 Introduction RonaldReaganoftenbeganhisspeechesbysaying,“I’mgoingtotalkabout controversialthings.”Despitethatwarning,hefirmlymaintainedhispublicbeliefthat America’sbestdayswereyettocome.ThisdescriptioncouldjustaseasilydescribeJimmy CarterandGeorgeH.W.Bush.AlthoughCarterandBushlackedReagan’sgolden eloquence,theirownabilitiesonthecampaigntrailsupportedsuccessfulpresidential candidacies.TheirpresidentialrhetoricwasnolessimportantorsubstantivethanReagan’s, giventheparticularmomentintimeandthegeneralera–thepost-Vietnam,laterColdWar years–inwhichtheygoverned.Together,Carter,Reagan,andBushdefinedandarticulated adistinctivepoliticaleraspanningthegulfbetweenaninfamousAmericanpolitical nightmareandafamousinternationalpoliticaltriumph–Watergateandthedissolutionofthe USSRCarter,ReaganandBushallhelddifferentideologiesandrecognizedthatmany peoplewithinAmericaandtheinternationalcommunitywoulddisagreewiththeirpersonal messages,buteachcopedwithdeterminedoppositionbecauseeachoneknewthathiswords woulddefinetheeraasmuchasthenationalandinternationaleventswhichheaddressed. Thus,theyutilizedthe“bullypulpit”whichtheirpredecessorPresidentTheodoreRoosevelt describedintheearly20 th Century. Argument Thecontentionmaintainedhereinisthatpresidentialpublicrhetoric,whetherlargeor small,famousorunknown,isuniqueinitsformationandworthyofexaminationbecause eachpieceofrhetoricprovideskeyinsightsintothehistoricalandpoliticalmomentintimein whichthePresidentoftheUnitedStatesdeliveredthewords.Second,byexaminingthese 2 rhetoricalworksasmomentsalongthehistoricalcontinuum,thereaderisthenableto examinetheera’sprogressionthroughpointsofrhetoricalcontinuityanddisagreement, therebybetterunderstandingpresidentialrhetoricbeyondadministrationboundaries.More oftenthannot,presidentialspeechesareonlyconsideredwithinthecontextofasingle presidentialadministration.Thisisalogicalapproachgiventhatthemandeliveringthe oratorywasthesamemanholdingtheofficeofPresident.However,thesubjectmatter withinpresidentialspeechesiscontinuousinprogression.Agivensubjectdidnotsuddenly dissipateattheverymomentinJanuarywhenthenextPresidenttooktheOathofOffice. Presidentscomeandgo,buttheissuesoftenremain. ThisdissertationrevealsthatwhatonePresidentsaysisrelevanttothewordsofboth predecessorandsuccessor,inordertoarriveatamoreseamlessunderstandingofpresidential rhetoricanditsimportance.WhatCartersaidanddidshouldbecomparedwithwhatNixon saidanddidbeforehandaswellaswithwhatReagansaidanddidafterward.Onlyby examiningaspeechwithinthesocialandpoliticalcontextoftheeracanonefullyappreciate itsrhetoricalandhistoricalsignificance.Thisdissertationwilldothatverything,usinga particularstructurewhichsupportstheanalysis.Thefirstdimensionofthisprojectisthe generalfoundation–theselectionofakeypieceofpresidentialrhetoricfromeachofthe threeadministrationsrelatingtothethreecorrelatingtopics–VisionforAmerica, PerspectiveofCommunism,ViewoftheBerlinWall.Thisdissertationthenexamineseach work’sdevelopmentalprocesses,makingparticularnoteofanypoliticalorcultural controversy.Thethirdcomponentistheexaminationofthepublic’sreactionandinput relatingtotheworksbeforeandaftertheirdelivery.Finally,eachsectioncloseswithhow 3 thethreeworkswithineachtopicalsectionrelatetooneanother,definetheeraasacollective unit,andhowthisexaminationhasfurtheredscholasticunderstanding. Mostimportantly,thisdissertationarguesthatalthoughCarter,Reagan,andBush eachfaceduniquecircumstancesandpossessedtheirowndistinctiverhetoricalstyleand personalideology,allthreefacedbroadColdWarquestionsthatantedatedtheir administrations.Thesemultidimensionalquestionstookavarietyofforms,gaveno considerationtothePresident’spositionpriortothesituationarising,andignoredhowthe Presidentwouldhavepreferredtorespondgivenanidealenvironment.Carter,Reagan,and Bushwereforcedtoreacttothehistorical,cultural,andpoliticalhurdlessenttheirway. Furthermore,theywereallrequiredtospeaktothemomentwhilemaintainingthepolitical anddiplomaticbalancesrequisiteoftheofficeofPresidentoftheUnitedStates. Ultimately,thisdissertationdoesnotlenditselftoasingledeclarative,one-sentence thesisstatement.Whatitdoespresentarethreedetailedcasestudies.Thisdissertation’s primaryaimisnottocounteraparticularscholar’sargument.Rather,itsgoalsare:(1)toadd anewdimensiontoexistingscholarship;(2)toconfirmorcontestwidely-heldassumptions regardingthePresidents,theiradministrativepolicies,andtheirspeechwritingteams;and(3) torevealpreviouslyunpublished,primary-sourcearchivalresearchthatdirectlyimpactsthe firsttwogoals.Theinformationcontainedhereinisablendingoftheoldandthenew.The “old”isestablishedscholarship,finaldraftsofspeeches,andpertinenthistoricalinformation ofthetimeperiod.Thisinformationalreadyexistsinthepublicsphere,butplaysan importantroleinprovidingastandardtowhichthenewresearchcanrelate.The“new”isa freshexaminationofeachspeechfromitsinceptiontoafteritsdelivery,declassified