Suchergebnisse

This book is an evolutionary examination of the rhetoric of the President of the United States, from George Washington to George W. Bush. It provides a close analysis of the history and content of inaugural addresses, State of the Union addresses, presidential proclamations, and executive orders in order to trace the changes in their use and impact from their origin to the present day. Content analysis of these forms of executive address are combined with case studies and illustrations to provide a complete look at the way that - contrary to the widely held ascription to a clear traditional ve

Scholars of the presidency often begin research or examination of the institution with the "modern" presidential era that is said to begin with Woodrow Wilson or Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This kind of approach, as well as the "traditional/ modern" paradigm in general, is problematic because it tends to summarily dismiss a large percentage of the executive officeholders due to their seeming lack of contribution to our understanding of the contemporary presidency. Instead, when the presidents of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are closely examined alongside all of their peers, they are remarkable not for the ways in which they fail to resemble today's executive, but for the ways in which they are similar. As such, we, as scholars who are looking for the most complete examination of the presidency, its evolution, and its changes, must move past the adoption of easy handles and evaluate the entirety of presidential history to ensure each era be recognized for its important contributions to the twenty‐first century presidency.

This article examines the usage of popular address rhetoric within all the State of the Union Addresses to determine whether presidents have consistently used this rhetorical tool, or whether the introduction of going public is indeed a 'modern' development that was little used in the rhetorical past of the presidency. By looking at instances in which the president identifies himself with the people, Congress, or as president, the author finds that many formerly 'traditional' presidents exhibit 'modern' tendencies, which suggests inconsistencies with the 'traditional/modern' divide that is a commonly utilized paradigm in presidential study. Adapted from the source document.