The State of Our Union is Strong!
 January 2010 to discuss plans for American aid to Haiti |
Excerpt from Bill Clinton's Final State of the Union Address (2000)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9EKfnzFZJQ
Excerpt from George W. Bush's State of the Union Address (First State of the Union since 9/11)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB6zEJexJEU
Excerpt from Barack Obama's First State of the Union (2009 shortly after the Credit Crisis)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy2VuXLfX8Y
In both style of governance and historical circumstance in which they found themselves, these three Presidents have a vast array of differences. However, each of these speeches indicate many commonalities. Using our class blog, evaluate how each of these Presidents use the state of the union to accomplish their goals. Please react to each other as well.
All three of these State of the Union Addresses attempt to lift the spirits of the Americans, especially in Obama's and Bush's cases. Clinton is able to list his achievements and earn standing ovations during his speech because America "will achieve the longest period of economic growth in history" as he states. Most of his speech consisted of achievements that clearly made America proud and happy to continue with Clinton as president. Bush, on the other hand, has 9/11 to deal with. He starts by trying to uplift the spirits again by saying that the State of the Union "has never been stronger." He also explains the progress that has been made to rebuild New York City and the Pentagon followed by what he plans to do while working as an ally with Afghanistan. Bush also gives a warning to terrorists saying that they will not be able to succeed under the justice of the United States. Obama has the most different speech of the three. No where in the clip provided did he say anything about the strength of the State of the Union. He begins addressing the problem he faces with the economy and directly focuses on what he plans to do about it. He does uplift the crowd by promising that all of this will be fixed. He explains that he plans to do this by making the reforms that have been pushed off for too long. He starts by explaining his ideas for new jobs, as part of the goals he plans to set for his presidency. In comparison with Clinton and Bush's Addresses, Obama states an accomplishment that refers to the passing of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
ReplyDeleteIn accordance with what Noelle has stated above, each of the presidents really put in a great effort with regards to "lift[ing] the spirits of the Americans." Clinton could not have said it better himself when he mentioned that this nation “has enjoyed, at once, so much prosperity and social progress, with so little internal conflict.” The overall calmness of this era fueled the economy and pushed forth what is known as the Information Age. In his State of the Union, Clinton thrives off of the people's energy, as seen in his facial expressions after such grand applause. Additionally, he connects with the people and further gains their support by praising what they have contributed to the overall well being of the country. With this, he helped sustain the prosperity of the nation. Bush conveys a sense of much needed hope and determination during the country’s time of trouble around 9/11. Neither the strength nor the tone falter in his voice throughout his State of the Union address. He assures the people that things will recover. He begins by saying that the military will be at full force to fight the War on Terror overseas. He also promotes that America will lead with “liberty, justice, and truth” because that is, in fact, what is right, regardless of the people's disgruntled views of the country or the world. As president, it was critical for Bush to remove his own personal views and to do what was best for the nation as a whole. Time will show that, in the end, Bush did keep this country safe after the devastating 9/11 attacks. On the other hand, Obama’s speech takes on a bit of a different tone--this time, about the economy. However, like the other two speeches, he firmly asserts that the nation will continue to strengthen and grow with the help of its people. Obama prompts the public to finally take responsibility for its past actions with regards to the decisions that have been made; the time has arrived—it cannot be pushed off any longer. He announces that he wishes to create more jobs in order to circulate wealth, repair the economy, and shrink the deficit. Since then, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has assisted in the president's stride to shrink the overwhelming deficit and balance out the economy.
ReplyDeleteThe State of the Union addresses of Clinton, Bush, and Obama in these videos differ in tone and atmosphere because of the different times in their presidency in which they were spoken. At the time of Clinton’s speech he was in the final year of his presidency and his goal with his State of the Union address was not to promote new legislature or deal with national issues, but to remind America of his accomplishments as president. That is why instead of focusing on the future, like President Obama, Clinton focuses on the past. His agenda for the rest of his presidency was simply to keep the prosperity going in America until his term was up. Jean was right when she talked about how Clinton wanted to “sustain the prosperity.” He left out plans for the future knowing they wouldn’t be necessary with a new president stepping into office. President Bush’s State of the Union address is completely different from Clinton’s because in his case America had just gone through a crisis. The American people were looking to Bush to talk about his plans to further deal with terrorism and prevent an attack like 9/11 from happening again. In Bush’s case he wanted to keep the support of the American people and make sure his war on terror continued to have funding. This is why he plays on the sympathies of the American people by talking about the child leaving a football for his dad who died in the towers. In reality this speech was the complete agenda of the future of the Bush administration that was focused mainly on fighting terrorism. Finally, Obama’s speech is focused mainly on plans for the future since he doesn’t have many laurels to rest on being a new president in office. Although Obama’s speech talks about a lot of worrisome issues for the future, he does maintain an uplifting and hopeful tone for America, like Noelle said. All of the issues Obama states are issues that we know he has tried to address or plans to address and sets up his presidential agenda almost line by line. But each of the State of the Union addresses always have a message of hope, strength, and unity, and try to keep Americans feeling patriotic and proud of their country. Every president wants the support of his people, so its natural that this is the main agenda of each president.
ReplyDeleteLike Noelle said, all three State of the Union speeches are trying to inform the people that change is happening and the Union already is or will soon be strong. Both Clinton and Bush state that the Union has never been stronger. Clinton shows the strength of the Union through the list of his many accomplishments such as the longest period of economic growth in history and the lowest poverty rates in 20 years. As Chelsea said, Clinton simply planned to keep the peace until the end of his term, so future plans were not included in his State of the Union address. Bush delivered his State of the Union speech just 4 months after 9/11, but was able to assure the people that although the nation was at war and the economy was in a recession, the Union has never been stronger. Unlike Clinton, Bush has to assure the people that they will recover from the crisis that is still fresh. He states that “adversity offers opportunity to change”. This statement in addition to already arresting terrorists in Afghanistan and his plans to comfort and rebuild New York City and the pentagon, are Bush’s ways of ensuring a Union even stronger than the one they already have. Obama’s speech is different than those of Clinton and Bush because he is new in office when he delivers it. Like Jean said, Obama “asserts that the nation will continue to strengthen and grow with the help of its people”. Obama states how the economy is in crisis, but the nation will rebuild and recover. After problems such as spending more money and getting more debt both in the government and personally, delaying the reform of health care and not finding many new sources of energy besides oil over the past few decades, Obama tries to assure the people that change will come along with recovery. He tells of his future economic agenda and concludes the video clip by mentioning the passing of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Through their State of the Union addresses, all three presidents are able to attempt to strengthen the people’s belief in the future of the country, despite the different problems encountered during each of their presidencies.
ReplyDeleteYes, as said by everyone so far, the State of the Union addresses are promising, but they are designed to be. The various State of the Union addresses all have similar goals. Every one is designed to boost the morale of American citizens by stating strengths, such as the economic growth under Clinton, rather than weaknesses, such as referencing the plans on how to deal with the terrorists as revenge for 9/11. The speeches vary in the time at which is was delivered. Clinton's was based entirely on his achievements as President, to show how great the country is doing. George Bush delivered his after a national disaster, making his more of a revenge cry and a morale booster, and Obama, with his fairly new presidency, and a financial crisis, his speech is the most general, yet perhaps the most strengthening for the American spirit. The future agenda of the U.S. is set, but is said to make the country sound heading in the right direction, even from Bush to Obama where one could argue the country is doing worse then before. A plan to do something unpopular is also not really mentioned in any speech. These Presidents, though men of distinction, are politicians as well, but the addresses react properly to the given situation, and serve their patriotic purpose, as well as their position in government.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Noelle in the aspect that they are trying to get their audience or citizens revved up. They are hoping to lift their spirits and make America excited and proud about what has been accomplished and what will be accomplished. Bill Clinton uses the example of Ben Franklin reflecting on the sun and that metaphor represents new beginnings and accomplishments. He focuses mainly on economic prosperity which certainly created enthusiasm in the audience. He doesn't dwell on mistakes but relays a positive attitude to his audience. I also agree with Eddie when he discusses boosting American moral. The idea of a speech is not to worry people about what is wrong with the nation, but to touch on what good has happened and what success has been delivered. Americans need confidence in order to perform best. In President Bush’s speech, he discusses a more serious topic of terrorism given what had occurred less than six months before. However, the audience still becomes enthused and proud of what Bush says and in a way, reassures citizens. He touches more on military and foreign relations but there is still cheering and excitement. President Obama is trying to relate to his audience about the economic crisis but in doing so, maybe startles Americans. There is noticeably less cheering than during Clinton’s speech, but Obama still manages to give America a confidence boost at some points. His speech is more serious than Clinton’s or Bush’s but nonetheless gives Americans hope, something all three speeches try to do.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chelsea in the aspect that each President's State of the Union address correlated with the social, political, and economic circumstances of that present time. President Bush, President Clinton, and President Obama utilized the present conditions in regards to their speeches. President Clinton employed the outstanding status of the economy as a prime factor in his State of the Union. President Clinton prided on his successes as President throughout the speech and gave reciprocal accomplishments with the aid of statistics; for example the crime rate and adoption rate. President Clinton used the State of the Union to reflect on the outstanding social, political, and economic wellbeing of the country and he did so successfully by voicing the nation's triumphs. President Clinton also created a feeling of American pride and culture by making allusions to Benjamin Franklin and the Founding Fathers, connecting the successes of that present day to the aspirations of important historical figures. As for President Bush however, he used his State of the Union to boost American morale in a time of crisis. In the wake of 9/11 and an economic recession, Bush used a Rogerian approach by addressing the negative circumstances of the union; an economic recession, a social national tragedy, and a war in Afghanistan. Despite all of these situations,President Bush evoked strength in a time of national weakness by stating the union of the United States had never been stronger. President bush used an approach of optimism to keep confidence in the American government and nation by making powerful statements of his plans of action. Bush touched on the successes of the American military and Congress to enforce his words. Thus, President Bush used the negative aspects of the nation at that time to emphasize the successes he made as President and embark on a positive future with him as Commander in Chief. President Obama had to approach the difficult task of building confidence in a much disgruntled nation due to the bad condition of the economy. President Obama sympathized with the American people in the difficult times he knew they were going through, but he made promises, with a strong attitude and voice that they will rebuild the economy. President Obama pleaded with the American people to restore confidence in the difficult times for there would be change; and he gave a summary of his economic agenda of investing in clean energy and education. To end the speech Obama, like the other Presidents, touched on a success to add credibility to his words and announced the passing of an important piece of legislation. President Bush and President Obama employed a loud and strong attitude with the audience in order to represent a strong leader. All three Presidents utilized successes under their presidency in order to add a believability to their words, and in order to gain confidence from their citizens. President Obama and President Bush both used negative conditions to address optimistic action and standpoints. They both also used an agenda to let the nation have a sense of direction. Nevertheless, all of these presidents used the State of the Union to build confidence in the American people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chelsea's remarks on the State of the Union addresses on these three Presidents in respect to the fact that the Presidents were at different points in their respective administrations, with very different circumstances during which they gave their speeches. The three Presidents all aim to sympathize with the American people like Noelle stated, and reassure them that the country is on the right track. Being that Clinton knew he was giving his last State of the Union address in 2000, he did not focus heavily upon his agenda in office, as he had already had a successful seven years behind him that led up to the time that he gave that speech. Instead, he focuses on the accomplishments he made in those years, and stresses that he will strive continue as he was in hopes of furthering the economic progress he made. He attempts to garner continued support for his actions by listing all he has done to help the country already, in order to reassure Americans that he is still looking out for them in his actions. Bush, after a year in office and the grievous tragedy of September 11, 2001, realizes that he must calm the fears to his people in his speech. He proudly declares that terrorism has no hiding place in the eyes to the United States: a message that the American people needed to hear in order to show them that their own government remained strong in the aftermath of the attacks, and so should they. On the other hand, in Obama's speech, one can see that he is significantly newer to such a leadership role: he tries to assure people that they made the right decision in electing him into office by telling them of his actions after being office for so short an amount of time. He too relates to the people and soothes their uncertainty relating to the economic recession. He informs the people of steps he has and will take to help them-aiming to gain support in such action in Congress and in the country as a whole. These three Presidents use similar methods to address the different situations that existed when they gave their speeches. They all seek to draw confidence in the United States government by relating to their concerns and wishes, assuring the Presidents themselves that they were on the right track.
ReplyDeleteAs Gina mentioned, and as is evident in the videos, each of the three presidents addressed the times at hand, using the nation’s current state as a sort of exposition to be further elaborated upon through reflection on the past and anticipation for the future. The contrast came, obviously, in the tone and ultimately the reality of the “present” condition for each of them. Convenient it was for Clinton to be able to announce the nation’s condition as “Never before [having] enjoyed at once so much prosperity, so few threats” at the pivotal turn of the century. He can then happily broadcast the notable statistics of the lowest unemployment rate and greatest economic growth in thirty years—not to mention the 20 million new jobs— and there is virtually nothing to be said that could taint this positivity and pride. Bush’s “present” is the recovery phase following 9/11, and he lays out that the nation is at war and that the economy is in a recession. However, he explains that despite these setbacks, “the state of the union has never been stronger,” and the present for him is recovery, unity and hope. And finally, Obama has a few more setbacks in his “present” which he must list, including economic crisis and the recession. As Steve mentioned, at the time of Clinton’s address the focus was on anticipation for a bright future to follow the bright present, and he is able to reflect on his successes and the nation’s progress to come. Bush must reflect on the tragedy of 9/11, but shapes the remainder of the speech around the idea that “adversity opens opportunity.” He rallies the crowd by proudly stating the efforts they’ve made against terrorism and encourages hope for a peaceful future: essential points to be made in order to restore hope and strength to the people. Obama must reflect on his past actions, and must justify them in a way, as to reassure the people that things will get better. He emphasizes that he relates to the people in these tough times, and lays out steps he has taken as well as his ideas for the future in order to assuage their fears and maintain their support. He concludes on the high note that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is now law, to show that progress has been made already. With slight variation, each of the three president’s utilize the State of the Union as a method of conveying hope, strength, pride and unity to the people as they reflect on the past and anticipate the future.
ReplyDeleteAs Chelsea previously stated, all three State of the Union speeches given by Clinton, Bush, and Obama all focused on issues relevent to the time period in which they were given. All three, although they all attempt to revive American spirit and inject positive outlooks onto the people, reflect a different tone and focus on an array of topics, from Clinton's emphasis on his achievements as a president, to Obama's stress on economic reform. Clinton, throughout the duration of his speech, pays tribute to America and what we, as a nation, have accomplished throughout his presidency. He quite often makes reference to statistics which display the overall prosperity and pride that America has acquired throughout his two terms. He clearly states that 20 million jobs were created, unemployment rates were significantly low, and the highest economic growth in thirty years. Due to the time of the speech, Cliinton was readily able to focus on the accomplishments of America, unlike Bush. Bush starts his speech with reference to the War on Terror and the destruction of 9/11. He notes the devestation that swept over America as the nation watched the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. As Kathryn said, he has no choice but to reflect on the terror of 9/11, but takes the stand that “the state of the union has never been stronger,” and with that, America will thrive again. Bush thanks the American people for their generosity and never-ending support during the tragedy, and emphasizes the fact that because of this generosity and support, America will remain strong. He instills a sense of hope and strength within the people, as he uses the tragedy of 9/11 and the War on Terror as a gateway to ensure a safe future, full of opportunity. In addition to Steve's point, Obama uses the State of the Union to assure the people that they have made the right decision of electing him as President of the United States. As seen through his election campaign, his slogan of "Change We Can Believe In," is used as the underlying message throughout the State of the Union. He most certainly uses the economy as a way to ensure the American people that change is coming, and as President, he will put America in a state of recovery. All three president's use the State of the Union to instill an overwhelming sense of pride, hope, strength, and confidence in themselves as leaders, and in America.
ReplyDeleteAs Emily said, the main purpose of the State of the Union is to “instill an overwhelming sense of pride, hope and confidence in them as leaders, and in America.” The speeches are different do to the fact that there were different pressing issues that needed to be addressed during each of their presidencies. For Clinton, he needed to show the American people how successful the United States has been during his presidency. He did this by stating statistics that proved how prosperous the United States was during his two terms as president. As Steve said, “Clinton knew he was giving his last State of the Union address in 2000, he did not focus heavily upon his agenda in office, as he had already had a successful seven years behind him that led up to the time that he gave that speech.” Clinton focused more on the success of the United States during his presidency than at his agenda for the upcoming year. Bush focused on 9/11 and the end of terrorism because that was the pressing issue when he had to give his speech in early 2002. Though he mentioned the recession the United States was in, he focused mostly on how terrorists were in cells in Guantanamo Bay and how people of America united after the tragedy of 9/11. Though it was difficult to focus a positive at such a difficult time, Bush focused on how terrorism would end and how in the four months after 9/11, the United States destroyed camps in Afghanistan. Obama focused on the recession that hit the United States during 2008. Though he mentioned how massive the recession was and how it affected a majority of the citizens of the United States, he emphasized how his agenda will help bring the United States out of the recession. He was also hopeful that the United States would be prosperous and out of the recession. Both Bush and Obama focused on their agendas because they were only in the beginning of their first term as president. The speeches were meant to hope to the American people that the future will be bright.
ReplyDeleteThe State of the Union is made to address the current condition of the United States, as well as an opportunity for the president to establish their goals and uplift the American people. In Clinton’s State of the Union, he emphasized the economic prosperity that the nation had under his presidency. As Kiera said, Clinton was able to show his successful two terms by using a variety of statistics which proved the positive state of the economy. In his speech Clinton did not focus on the future ahead for Americans, but rather spoke of his strong points in office. In Bush’s State of the Union, he initially addresses the hardships America has faced such as September 11th, foreign terrorist threats on the US, and the economic recession. However, he then speaks of how the nation united after the terrorist attacks like never before to form a strong front in the face of adversity. Bush talks about the efforts after 9/11 like his success of arresting terrorists and rebuilding the damaged areas. In order to inspire the American people, Bush tells of the progress to end the War on Terror and praises the military for their dedication and hard work. Bush continues to speak of justice, strength, and liberty, instilling hope for the future and continued success in stopping terrorists and their threats against our nation. Obama addressed the recession that is affecting Americans and the state of crisis the economy is in. He spoke of his agenda for the future to act quickly and efficiently in order to pull the United States out of the economic slump and take action toward prosperity. Obama says the union will be stronger than ever before when he is done rebuilding and recovering America. Obama’s goal of the State of the Union was to ensure Americans that the president is doing everything he can to fix the economic problem and create a solid and successful country.
DeleteJust like Eddie said, these speeches aren't just delivered to congress. These speeches are watched nation wide by the American public and thus have to be written for their understanding. And because of this a lot of the speeches are written solely for applause. Clinton talks about teen birth rates being down and abortions being up 30% as if any of that really matters for the continued growth of the nation. Bush throws in a lot of fluffy sentences that are nice to listen to but are pointless none the less. He says, "Terrorist leaders who urged their followers to sacrifice their lives are now running for their own" but doesn't follow up with a plan to catch those "running" terrorists. And Obama avoids numbers and statistics for a more relaxed friendly tone. Though he was better than Bush in addressing actual problems that need to be fixed by mentioning education and healthcare reform, much of the speech was just broad claims. While the speeches are effective in gaining the public's approval for a course of action it'd be nice to see a president willing to say "Look, nothing about our situation is pretty..."
ReplyDeleteAs everyone previously stated, the three State of the Union Addresses delivered by Clinton, Bush, and Obama, directly correlated to the atmosphere surrounding the times and the state of the nation. Clinton speaks in an upbeat tone because the country is in a period of success; the economy is booming and unemployment is down. Bush speaks in grievance and distress, because the nation just experienced 9/11, now going into war, and the economy is starting to recede. Obama speaks opposite to Clinton because the nation is in a recession and the economy is affecting people nation wide. Both Bush and Obama instill hope and try to stay positive, saying that the nation will recover and rise up to become the way it used to, and as Kiera said, it gives Americans hope to what the future will hold. All three of the Presidents speak not only to Congress but to the people, allowing there to be unity amongst the nation in discussing what is good and bad at the moment.
ReplyDeleteAs many other such as Emily have said, the main reason for the differences in the speeches of all three presidents was because of the different circumstances they found themselves in. Clinton found himself in a time of prosperity, and therefore had very little problems to address. His whole speech in that clip was essentially him talking about how amazing everything was under his administration. On the other hand, Bush and Obama were not so fortunate. Bush's speech mainly dealt with his successes in fighting terrorism, and how he plans to continue fighting terrorism because his state of the union happened to be the first one after 9/11. Obama needed to address the economy, which was the burning issue when he stepped into office. He spoke about basically the problems of the economy and then he vowed to fix it. After viewing all three of their speeches, I think the main purpose of the state of the union is to keep the spirits of the people high.
ReplyDeleteDespite differences in style of governance and the circumstances at hand during each presidency, each of these three presidents—Clinton, Bush, and Obama respectively, used this speech to speak not only to Congress, but also to the people, instilling a sense of confidence and hope. Like Noelle said, each of these State of the Union Addresses “attempt to lift the spirits of the American people.” During Clinton’s State of the Union Address in 2000, he starts off by saying how we are all “fortunate to be alive” at a time like this. The following sentences, which begin with the words “Never before…” support his statement, including that the country has never before “enjoyed at once, so much prosperity and social progress with so little internal conflict and so few external threats.” As Emily previously stated, Clinton incorporates numerous statistics throughout his speech because it is towards the end of his second term, a time in which the American people are prospering. Rather than list what will be done in the future he notes the highlights of his presidency, while at the same time instilling the idea that the United States will continue on the same track, even though in the coming years we find that is not the case. Bush’s State of the Union Address takes place under very different circumstances, only a few months after the 9/11 attacks. This is a time where the people of the United States truly need support and a “lift in spirit.” Despite the differences in circumstances, Bush reiterates a line Clinton used—“that the state of our union has never been stronger.” He does not avoid the realities of the time, but focuses more on what the United States is doing in response to the situation as well as the country’s accomplishments within one year alone. As Chelsea stated, he also plays off the sympathies of Americans when he mentions the little boy who left a football for his father who died in the 9/11 attacks. He tries to reduce the fears of the American citizens and encourages them to look towards a better future. In Obama’s State of the Union Address, Obama clearly states that he not only hopes to restore confidence, but “will” which is quite a strong statement. He focuses on the economy, which is a primary concern for Americans. He addresses the economic difficulties the American people are facing, but remains optimistic towards our nation’s future. Obama states that “we will rebuild” and “that the nation will emerge stronger than before,” and discusses his economic agenda, which revolves around the concept of long-term prosperity rather than short-term economic gain. Aside from mentioning the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which had just been made a law Obama’s State of the Union focused more on what would be done in the future, rather than what had been done because he had only recently taken office. For each of these presidents, The State of the Union Address served a similar purpose, which was to convey a sense of strength, unity and hope for our nation’s future even though the circumstances at hand varied for each.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else, I noted that President Clinton’s speech focuses on past achievements while the other two presidents’ speeches discuss the future. Obviously, as others said, this is because President Clinton had had a very successful seven years in office before giving this speech. Of course, his speech let’s us know about that—he mentions the tremendous economic prosperity the United States enjoyed under his administration and the great social progress made. I thought it was interesting to listen to President Clinton speak in that he mentioned how welfare payrolls had been cut in half. The way he said it made it sound like the reduction of welfare spending was a product of a better America—something Republicans and Democrats would support. Nowadays, when politicians talk about welfare, it seems as though Democrats see it as a necessary element of our society which does not need to be reduced, and Republicans see instant spending cuts as the only way to cut it down. It would be good politics for a President to say he would cut welfare through progress, but one doesn’t hear much of that anymore. The most interesting part of President Bush’s speech is how Congress seems to applaud his statements about war and Guantanamo Bay. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, many moderates adopted the hawkish, go-get-‘em attitude generally exalted by conservatives. Undoubtedly, President Bush truly believed in this attitude—as a conservative, he probably believed it was the right way to approach foreign policy. One’s reaction to his speech truly depended on his ability to make his listeners feel and agree with that attitude. He played upon the post-9/11 anger of Americans directly when he mentioned the story about the child and his father. The goal of this rhetoric was to create public support for the wars he started. Like President Clinton, President Obama talked quite a bit about the past; however, while Mr. Clinton spoke about his accomplishments, Mr. Obama spoke about the failures of the previous administration. He decried the dependency of Americans on foreign oil, our purportedly poor health care system, and deregulation and reckless spending. He claimed that politicians had been relying on short-term solutions for too long, and that the day of reckoning had come to bite the bullet and handle our long-term problems. Unfortunately, many of those problems persist, and the Bush tax cuts—which might have played a role in what Mr. Obama called the funneling of surplus wealth to the rich—were extended. Regardless, President Obama’s speech was a continuation of his 2008 campaign—declaring the state of the Union to be unsatisfactory, yet fixable via truly dynamic reforms. Like President Bush, he tried to use the emotions of the people—their desperation regarding the recession—to create support for his agenda. All three presidents tried to put themselves in a better light via the State of the Union. Having accomplished much already, President Clinton merely summarized his achievements. Having started wars to procure freedom/security lost on 9/11, President Bush tried to gain support for his wars, and having just taken over a country in a state of disarray, President Obama tried to spark the desire for reform.
ReplyDeleteIn all three speeches, the presidents had very positive and optimistic outlooks--they had to. In Bush's and Obama's situations, nothing could be worse for the morale of the people than if the very leader of their nation had a negative outlook on the country and its situation. However, in Clinton's case, he was positive because he had a reason to be positive: the nation had gone through a fantastic seven years during his presidency, and there were no indications that darker times were coming. Clinton relied heavily on facts and figures; showing that there were many reasons why the people should be optimistic about their country and the state it was in. These percentage increases and "the best in x amount of years" wrapped the citizens in a warm and fuzzy blanket of hope. In Bush's speech, the country had just undergone a direct attack on its soil, and he knew the people only cared about that at that time. Because of this, he focused on what he had done about terrorists since September 11th; igniting the patriotic souls of people everywhere. He did not talk about the economy or domestic policy, only about what he was doing to stop the terrorists. In Obama's time, the country had also just had a crisis, but this one was of a different nature: economic. As such, Obama focused on people's wallets and how he was going to help fix the economy and the job market. In talking about what caused the economic crash, he deftly brought up three issues that he campaigned on--energy, schooling, and healthcare. He knew that people cared about the economy at that point, so if he could say that the crash of the economy was related to those three things, he could gather support to reform them.
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned in Kevin Hartman's and many other responses, the main purpose of the state of the union is to keep the spirits of the people high, which is clearly presented in Clinton's, Bush's, and Obama's State of the Union speeches. However, in my opinion this frequently presented fact may not be the best scenario for our nation. Although the presidents know what the people want to hear, and this being optimism for the future, sometimes we need to hear the truth. One can clearly see Clinton's final State of the Union focused on prosperity of the nation and the successes throughout his presidency, while Bush and Obama's first State of the Union speeches focused on a positive future because the nation was not at the best current status. This fact signifies that both Presidents Bush and Obama entered office with difficulties put in front of them as a priority to handle. As mentioned in Obama's speech, the nation (economically) did not fall into decline over night. Further, he stated that we have known for decades that our survival depends on discovering alternate forms of energy and that our biggest problem is that we always fail to look ahead into the future. Now, why is it that during President Clinton's State of the Union, which was given less than ten years before Obama's focused strictly on the positive and failed to mention any problems that may occur in the near future. Clinton was feeding the public with information that appealed to himself and made his presidency appear to be a success. President Clinton revealed that during that time there were few external threats present and that they were successful in lowering unemployment and poverty rates and building a new economy; meanwhile within a short time-span, America's economy was in a recession and the nation was at war. Possibly if Clinton had focused on the future, rather than his past actions that resulted in prosperity, our nation would not still be currently suffering. Additionally, it is ironic that Clinton made reference to Ben Franklin's "the rising or setting sun" because even though Clinton believed he set the stones to make the nation a "rising sun," less than 2 years later 9/11 occurred, clearly signifying a setting sun. Although I have shown a clear unliking to Clinton's speech, the next two succeeding presidents attacked the State of Union with optimism as well, its just that the events that occurred after Clinton's speech result in the loss of some of his credibility. Lastly, Obama in his speech was somewhat hypocritical in the sense that he said that as a nation we fail to look ahead into the future, meanwhile he focused a majority on past events and actions, however this decision may have been to reason for the current instability of the nation.
ReplyDeleteLike Chelsea was saying above, each President had different situations affecting the State of the Union. With Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, they both stated how the nation was stronger than ever, but didn’t specifically reference how the problems within the country would be fixed. Bush did mention how we were “winning the war on terror” and promised that terrorists would not escape the justice of America. Bush revolves his speech around the tragedy of 9/11 because it greatly affected everyone in the country, as well as it proved how America was making a comeback only 4 months after the disaster. In President Obama’s State of the Union address, he clearly says how he knows the economy is failing. The entire speech has to do with how he promised to reform the economy, to fix our debt and make new health care reforms to benefit Americans. “Debt is higher than every before” and Obama promised to regulate our economy through his agenda that starts with creating more jobs for the average American. Obama is really the only president out of these examples to actually give any promising answers as to how, specifically, the country will get out of its predicaments and be fixed. Despite each president having different topics to speak about, they all say how America will succeed and is a strong country.
ReplyDelete(TOM POLLY, I DONT KNOW WHY IT SAYS "THE PARROT"....BUT I LIKE IT.) As previously stated in Hartman's response and in many others, all three of the president's speeches intended to uplift the spirits of the American people whether it was through powerful statements or by connecting with the people. However, all three of these speeches were different due to the different time periods and current issue at hand. President Clinton's speech was more focused on stating the greatness that America is experiencing at that time. He pulled out statistic after statistic to emphasize how successful the United States was at that time. Unfortunately, after 9-11 and the war on terror, President Bush's speech was more focused on the current economic recession and sympathized with the American people through his story of the little boy and his note to his Dad on the football. Bush rallied the crowd by stating that these terrorists could not escape from our nation's justice. With the economy not getting any better, it was addressed as an "Economic Crisis" by Barack Obama in his State of the Union speech. Obama got the American people on their feet when he powerfully stated "We will rebuild, recover, and emerge stronger than before." The president needed to restore confidence in people's hearts because the current instability was effecting every day life.
ReplyDeleteAs Liz along many other students noticed, the main goals for each of the three presidents' speeches was to raise moral, and also to gain support for future plans in office in the case of Presidents Bush and Obama. Clinton was presented with the least challenging of the three speeches in achieving these goals, without the need to raise but more to sustain and enjoy the nation's high moral. Leaving office with admirable economic and social statistics and no major problems to address, Clinton was able to recite a speech comprised mostly of praise for the country's prosperity and optimism for the future. Bush was presented with a more challenging speech in the wake of 9/11. This national disaster left America with a very low moral, however replies to the President's agenda were mostly favorable. The terrorist attack brought the nation together, and Bush's actions against terrorist organizations and his efforts in Afghanistan were met with nationwide support. Bush was able to use the nation's restlessness for action to rally support for his foreign policies and helped raise the countries moral by reporting military successes. President Obama was faced with the most obstacles in achieving these goals in his speech. Obama took office with a declining housing and stock market and a rising unemployment rate. These were problems which gripped the entire nation, however rallying support behind economic reforms is not as easy as rallying support behind actions against terrorist organizations. President Bush was able to use many emotional appeals during his speech, and the entire nation was able to sympathize and understand the problems they faced. President Obama was not able to use exactly the same strategy. He was able to use some emotional stories to generate sympathy among financially suffering Americans, however these examples do not generate the same level of response as President Bush's. President Obama is faced with a bigger challenge because while most of the nation can agree to take action against terrorist organizations, economic problems are more complicated and have a more opinionated path to recovery. Obama entered office during a stressful time, and while Clinton was able to list the achievements of his time in office Obama was instead listing the preexisting problems that the nation was faced with addressing. Obama had listed many mistakes which were made before his time in office such as impulsive and poorly thought out spending, and he warned the nation that the day of reckoning had arrived in which these problems must finally be addressed and fixed. Trying to rally a nation behind entering a time of complicated and difficult reforms is a challenging obstacle to overcome in one speech. -Katie Wall
ReplyDeleteAs others have stated, the State of the Union speeches made by past three presidents have served primarily to improve the spirits of the American People, though the times at which the speeches were delivered were experiencing rather different events. During Clinton’s speech, the US was going through economic growth and was “the strongest it had ever been”. He made sure to mention all the achievements made in the country and that the only thing Americans do is to look to the future, to make it even better that it currently is. Clinton had to acknowledge few difficulties the US was enduring in his speech unlike Bush and Obama. Bush, also, stated early in his speech that the country was the strongest it had ever been, and that we have a strong influence on other countries. Bush must reflect on the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and mentions how we are now moving forward, rebuilding the affected areas and working hard to find the people responsible for the horrid attacks. It was important for Bush to state how powerful the US was around the world, how we have freed the oppressed and how we set an example of freedom by which all people should live. In his speech, President Obama, reflected on the failing economy and made Americans feel reassured that something was being done by the government to help solve the multitude of issue created by the recession. He said the US will “rebuild, recover, and come back stronger” and that we must look to the distant future to solve our problems, not only to the immediate results. The three presidents use their State of the Union Address as a means to connect to the people of the United States and tell them that the US is strong and to believe in the country and its people.
ReplyDeleteNot to copy the PaRR0T, but the main goal of the address in this day and age is to tell the American people how great things are going. The speeches may change due to the timeframe in which the speech is given, but they all have this common theme. Clinton's speech reflects the prosperity of the time period and plays off of the facts he has prepared to prove that they were indeed in a golden age of sorts. Bush's speech was during the reconstructive period after 9/11, and so it was filled with hope and vengeance at the same time, because, like Zappa touched upon, the American people were angry at what had happened, yet still united and had a gung-ho attitude and wanted those responsible for the attacks punished. What I thought was interesting was that despite the close proximity in time from the speech and the attacks, Bush did not go into detail about 9/11 at all. However, I do know that this was only a part of the speech, and not it in its entirety, so it is possible that he did in a different section of the speech. Obama's speech varied slightly from the other two, as it was much more negative at points, blaming people for mistakes, yet still had uplifting moments in the speech. I personally think 9/11 is a more depressing crisis than a economic one, yet the bits of speech did not reflect this.
ReplyDelete-Tom Catinella
As Jenn an many others have stated each president uses his address to build hope and confidence within the people. Clinton uses his speech to point out all he has accomplished while president. The economy is booming and the future is bright.
ReplyDeleteClinton mentions how everyone in the country is lucky to be able to experience life with such positive outlooks and such a strong union. Clinton focuses on his past achievements to get people to continue to support him and put faith into him and his administration. Bush's speak takes a much different path then Clintons because it was give shortly after the attacks on 9/11. Bush thanks the American people for the continued support and states that America is fighting terrorist and will become stronger then it was before. Bush makes it clear the union is still strong. Obama opens his speak more directly then the others. Obama begins with acknowledging the recession the country was and never mentions the strength of the union. Obama acknowledges that most of the country has been personally affected by the current economic situation, but states that he plans to change this, he states how he plans to rebuild the economy and have America come out of the crisis strong. Although each president has a different approach through their state of the union they attempt to build faith and support within the American people.
As others have stated each of these speeches are to address their agendas and raise the spirits of the American people. Clinton goes on to brag about the success of his presidency which occurred during a time of prosperity. Bush talks about his great foreign policy and his brilliant wars and puts in a lot of fluff statements to make people feel better about themselves. Obama’s speech touches on many economic issues. Out of all the speeches his was the one that actually address the problems of the American people. While some specifics were lacking at least some sort of a plan was put forth and the acknowledgement that there are problems in this country was good to hear.
ReplyDelete- Eric Hitchings
As previously stated by many students, all three of the presidents brought up how important the solidarity of the American people is in order to re-instill a sense of hope and pride. Clinton’s speech focused on the prosperous state of the economy at the time, the achievements explained with the use of all the statistics and he referenced many events from the past. His speech, as Katie stated, celebrated the nation’s high morale and brought even more optimism for the future. Bush’s speech was not as easy as Clinton’s. The speech, the first State of the Union post 9/11, was much more emotional, incorporating the anecdote of the little boy and his football, and focused on the War on Terror. He talked about how despite the tragedies that were occurring, the nation came together to overcome evil and defend the liberty and justice of the nation. Obama’s speech as stated by Jess, was more direct with the American people. He talks about the economy and how actions of previous administrations intensified the crisis. Obama positively touches on the future by stating that now is the time to tackle this issue. He promises that with his plans, the economy will be rebuilt and be even better than before. Overall, a main point in the presidents’ speeches was to instill a greater spirit of hope and strength in the people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Eric's statement that Obama's State of the Union seemed to address more problems that must be fixed then the other speeches. However this is mostly due to there being far more major concerns then during Clinton's presidency. In Clinton's speech he does not mention any negatives but rather sticks to the positives and the great prosperity the country was experiencing at the time. Bush's State of the Union lies in between Obama and Clinton's speeches because while he obviously had to address a major tragedy, Bush also spoke of the positive achievements that had been made since the 9/11 attacks. Though he did not mention many further plans for the future, when Obama did. Obama was looking to assure the public that he could bring change and therefore that is what he emphasized in his speech.
ReplyDeleteIn each of their speeches, all three of the presidents talked about their recent achievements. Presidents Bush and Obama, both in the beginning of their presidencies, outlined a plan for the future in response to recent crises. As others have said before, the presidents attempt to give hope and inspire the American people for the coming years. President Clinton, as it was his last year in office, was able to speak about his accomplishments during his term. President Bush faced the difficulty of recovering after 9/11, and had to move the people of America to come together in a time of need. As Katie said previously, Obama had to account for the problems of the national economy, and provide a plan for action. Each president also does an effective job of delivering a “State of the Union,” detailing the current problems facing the nation and how they will be approached. President Bush and President Clinton both use the phrase “my fellow Americans” to connect with their audience, and all of the speeches employ very emphatic words and emotions, and show that they care about the nation’s wellbeing. As the leader of the country, it is important for the president to reassure the people, and speak to them on a personal level. President Bush and Obama talk about both good times and bad, and how the country will recover from the bad times, and how the United States is the best country. There is a strong sense of pride in each speech, as the president is proud of the nation and its people.
ReplyDeleteWhereas President Clinton and President bush's speeches were aimed at highlighting the goals accomplished by the American government during their presidency, President Obama's speech is aimed more at future ambitions within his presidency. Dissecting the speeches further will reveal that while both President Clinton and President Bush focused on accomplished goals, Bush focused more on foreign affairs and terrorism - a clear appeal to emotion - while Clinton focused on the immense amount of economic improvements over the seven years prior to the given speech. I always find it interesting to listen to Clinton's speeches for he always uses concrete data and statistics in his speeches - more so than any other president I have heard speak. I find it to be incredibly effective in regard to rhetoric, for it sways the reader by reinforcing the claims of success with factual proof. While Clinton states that the economy is the best it has been in the last two decades or so, President Bush speaks of the horrific event that is 9/11. His speech appeals to the American people through emotion, as he ensures that the terrorists are being dealt with; he states that the training camps are being destroyed, and terrorists are being detained. Lastly, as Obama focuses on the future goals he wishes to accomplish; and similar to Clinton's speech, he focuses on economic - in general more domestic - reforms in comparison to foreign affairs and terrorism. As Katie mentioned in a previous post, Obama focused on reforms that were necessary, maybe not completely based on the events that transpired under the watch of past presidents, but problems that have be exacerbated and that desperately require a solution.
ReplyDeleteThe State of the Union addresses given by Clinton, Bush and Obama were done in a manner that primarily focused on lifting the spirits of Americans. However, each speech differs because each president dealt with different circumstances in which they brought to the country’s attention. For example, President Clinton’s focused primarily on the present economic prosperity and growth. As Amanda stated, the economy was said to be “the strongest it had ever been” during Clinton’s presidency. The biggest component of Clinton’s speech was him talking about all the social and economic achievements and acknowledging the positive state the country was in. Also, the primary goal of his speech was to tell the American people his plan of maintaining such prosperity for the future. In Bush’s State of the Union address, his demeanor is a bit different than that of Clinton. During this time, the country had just been through a time of crisis, 9/11. Bush’s State of the Union address focused on what we can do to make our country better and safer, along with everything we had already done to work on the matter since the tragedy. Lastly, Obama’s state of the union address was during a time of economic crisis and devastation for many people. His speech was meant to restore the people’s faith in the government and the economy. His main purpose was to let people know that himself along with the rest of the government, is going to do everything in their power to make such a terrible time a little easier and eventually fix it and bring us to a better and strong state. Obama was trying to give the American people a well needed confidence boost and return hope to their lives. Overall, each president used their State of the Union addresses to assess the modern era and portray how to maintain and achieve a positive American future.
ReplyDeleteMuch like the other bloggers have stated, the presidents' State of the Union addresses have served as ways to raise the morale of the citizens of America and to express each president's agenda. Yet unlike President Bush and President Obama, President Clinton spoke mostly of the successes of his presidency in his speech. He focused on America's success as an economic nation, with long-running prosperity, higher employment, a greater surplus, and social progress. Clinton classified his presidency as one with little internal crisis or external threat, leading America to have the longest period of economic growth in it's history. He used facts and statistics to add more legitimately to the success of America as an economic powerhouse. On the other hand, President Bush was faced with the devastation after 9/11, and his goal in his State of the Union address was to lift the spirits of America and keep our nation strong. He convinced our nation that he, as well as our nation's troops, had made successful efforts to defend justice. Bush boosted our confidence by saying we were sending terrorists "running for their lives". He hit a heartstring with Americans by bringing up personal stories of loss from those affected by the terrorist attacks of the Twin Towers. Bush assured us that by working as allies with Afghanistan, we were proudly winning the war against terrorism. In President Obama's speech, he focused on the economic recession which was hindering Americans. Obama spoke of the jobs lost by countless Americans, in situations people understood of personally. He stressed that his presidency was the time to bring America out of it's economic crisis. Obama's mentioned legislations would bring healthcare reforms and new jobs to citizens throughout America. All three presidents were quite successful in arousing the people of America and expressing their agendas using their State of the Union addresses.
ReplyDeleteAs many other students have stated, the goal of most State of the Union speeches are to uplift the spirits of the American people, and to appear optimistic with high hopes for the future, since they are broadcast for all to hear. President Clinton essentially gave a victory speech. His purpose was not so much as to set an agenda, but to reflect on the triumphs of America during his presidency. Since the country was in a very good place at the time, Clinton was able to speak the truth when he used statistics to emphasize how well the US was doing. He used his speech as a way to end his presidency on a positive note. The format of his speech served to restore trust in the government—to show people that the government is capable of doing what it set out to do. In his speech, he praises the work of everyone, and leaves the people feeling proud to be an American. President Bush’s speech was more of a ‘Get ready for battle’ speech. Since his State of the Union was giving only four months after 9/11, he used the situation to his advantage to get people fired up about going to war. The War on Terror had become something real and tangible. There was now a reason to fight. That is what President Bush tried to get across in his speech. Unlike Clinton, who spoke of all the wonderful achievements and successes of the past few years, Bush spoke of the future, and his intent to get the people behind 9/11—the terrorists—to Guantanamo Bay. Obama, the didactic president as the media likes to say, spoke on the specific problems that have caused the economy to fall. He criticizes the former president and congress for not dealing adequately with the crisis, putting off decisions until tomorrow. He, like Bush, looks to the future and talks of all the things he hopes to get accomplished with his economic agenda. Obama is in favor of action, or that is what he said in his speech. Unfortunately, the president does not make laws, so although he might propose something in his speech; it is up to the cooperation of the Senate and House to act upon his words. For the times that each speech was given, they were all appropriate, though they vary greatly from each other.
ReplyDeleteThe common thread within each State of the Union Address was to create unity and enthusiasm for future investments and legislature. Each president gave their speech after or during a significant tie period in American history. I agree with Katie's comment on the idea of raising or sustaining moral as a way to get the American people on board with their goals, moving forward. President Clinton's speech was comprised of praising the United States on its strong and stable economic state. Clinton addresses his plans to further extend the success of social, economic, and more specifically, employment ideals. With the people being already pleased with the prosperity of the government Clinton gave hope to an even more lucrative future. President Obama similarly wanted to create a sense of unity and justice within the confines of the American people. He encouraged the American citizens that as a whole they would see an increase in employment rate and a revived economy. His mentioning of the difficult times individuals and families are going through due to the recession, was a strong point in reassuring these people will see exponential growth in the future. He closes his speech by solidifying a start to his future plans by stating the Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been signed into law. President George W. Bush had a more difficult speech to address because of the tragic circumstance that was 9/11. Similarly to Clinton and Obama he tries to bring unity to the American people, however, in this case to comfort and reassure one another during a time of uncertainty. He gains much approval during his speech when he recalls current missions and future plans to overtake terrorism and keep the country safe from future national crisis'. Bush played off of the emotions of the American people by sharing personal stories of fallen heroes. Bush then describes his hopes to rebuild a stronger nation then before and to ensure the protection of the people. Each president was effective in their speech and delivered clear and unified plans to the American people.
ReplyDeleteIn all three speeches, the presidents attempt to make the people proud to be Americans and like Corinne said, they are optimistic with high hopes of the future. Both Clinton and Bush stated that the "union has never been stronger." Although they both believed to be President at the strongest time in American history per-say, they had differing speeches. Clinton, like Amanda said, spoke mostly of the successes during his presidency such as lowered crime, low unemployment, and the growth of the economy. Clinton truly made you feel that the US was the best place to live on Earth.
ReplyDeleteBush on the other hand, focused solely on devastation, 9/11, and how he is making America better after it. He shows how he is "defending justice" by stating how he has dealt with 9/11 and how he has successfully dealt with some terrorists.
Obama, like Bush, talked a lot about negative things that America has gone through such as the recession, but how he was going to do everything to make it better with different reforms. Overall, Clinton's State of the Union was the best due to the sole fact that everything he talked about was positive and made everyone proud to be an American more so than Bush or Obama.
Each State of the Union Address by Clinton, Bush, and Obama all begin with a reflection upon recent events. As Corrine stated, Clinton did pretty much give a victory speech. Clinton reflected upon the economic prosperity of the country and how it was the absolute best of times. Essentially, Clinton brought out a laundry list of postive things that occurred during his administration (low unemployment amongst minorities, lower teen birth rates, higher adoption rates). As for Bush, the tone and subject matter was quite different. The time of his State of the Union Address was within a year or so the of the 9/11 attacks. Citizens of America wounds were still relatively raw when this speech was made. Bush made it a priority to emphasize the fact that the U.S. was going to fight back and was going to attempt to prevent any future attacks. He mentioned that they had destroyed terrorist training camps and had brought many terrorists to Guantananomo Bay -- precisely what the American people wanted to hear. After stating these facts, Bush set the agenda to maintain liberty throughout the world, more specifically, Afghanistan. Finally, Obama, like Bush, had to address pressing issues. The economy was in the midst of the Credit Crisis and Obama spoke about how things needed to change. He spoke about how the previous administration and congress had been delaying on important decisions. Obama, also spoke about the many reasons why the economy dipped into a recession (bad loans, removal of regulations, etc.) and what his agenda is. His goal, as he says, is to create jobs and put "more money in people's pockets." Goodnight y'all.
ReplyDeleteThe State of the Union addresses all focused on major recent events, the presidents reaction all try to boost the morale on the subject at hand and give hope for the future. As Jon stated Clinton and Bush focused on the things that have gone well in the presidency thus far. Clinton references the vast amount of economic and social progress that has occurred during his presidency. Clinton adds on to the economic successes that have occurred during his presidency and goes on to state how there have been little threats or internal crises; therefore the basis of Clinton's speech was to show the positives that have occurred thus far in his term. Bush's speech was more focused on making the American people feel safe again after the attacks on 9/11. Bush references how they have captured thousands of terrorists and put them into Guantanamo Bay; he also references how he has freed a country. Bush's speech is highlighted when he states how we are winning the war on terror. This statement was one the American people needed to hear in the time of crisis and thus I feel that Bush was successful in making Americans feel safe once again. Finally Obama's speech is focused on the economic collapse that he states has been known will come for decades; and how we have not changed our energy problem and are importing more oil than ever. Therefore Obama is almost putting the blame on previous presidents. Despite putting some blame on previous presidents Obama takes the situation into his hands. He is sympathetic with the people who have lost jobs and makes a promise that he will get the country out of the recession. Overall the State of the Union addresses are focused on keeping the morale of the citizens high as well as making statements about recent events; all of these presidents speeches were successful in these areas.
ReplyDeleteAndrea !!
ReplyDeleteComparing the three speeches, it seems like Clinton had the obvious advantage. It was easy for him to get the crowd into a roar because the country was in such a good economic state. And this was the simple commonality between these three videos, people love to hear that they're going to have a steady income and be able to put food on the table. These president's goals can be blurted out in a vague but extremely positive way, and the crowd will go wild, creating positive energy on what the president has planned to do. The State of the Union is a way for the Presidents to boost the country's confidence that everything will be okay.
As others have commented, there are specific reasons to any speech, like the booming economy of Clinton's time, the distraught and broken nation of Bush's time, and the recession of Obama's. No matter what the reason, the State of the Union was there to boost whatever previous confidence the country had at the time. These presidents, as probably many before, wanted the country to be in the best "mood" or state possible, and the state of the union is the perfect place to be perfectly positive. I also feel like these speeches are different than any other speeches the presidents will give. These stand out because they say only what the country can and will do, and usually exactly how the president plans on doing it. In this setting, the presidents can rely on the positive reactions they have just prepared their audiences with.
As many others said, these speeches all differ but are also similar. In all of the videos the president talked in a very positive tone with a bright outlook on things to come. Clinton basically named off, as Tom said, a laundry list of positive things that was achived during his time in office. Economic prosperity, low unemployment rate, ect. Bush, had a different situation at hand. Bush had to get up infront of the nation and tell them exactly what they wanted to hear. He had to tell them that everything will be okay and that justice will be served to get the nation back on their feet and ready to deal with the situation at hand. Finally, Obama came in stating the problem we already have and will continue to happen (economic crisis) unless something is done. He also in some ways is telling people what they want to hear. He is taking the matter into his own hands and is telling the people he will take control to get this economy back under control. All in all the state of the union addresses are meant to keep the nations spirts up and to reiderate that they will take control of any situation that is put at hand.
ReplyDeleteAll three of these men use the address to put out goals that they wish to accomplish during their presidency. They state what they plan to do in order to get the people of the country riding behind an idea so that it can be pushed through legislation. During Clinton's presidency, the country was having a fantastic amount of economic expansion. He was able to get the crowd going because they loved hearing how great things were already and how much better Clinton planned to make them become. They would certainly believe him considering how successful his presidency was already. The Bush presidency was very much characterized by 9/11, so he obviously had to bring it up. His was more of an emotional speech where he did not try to win his party more support, but rather wanted the country to come together as one during a time of crisis. Also involving times of crisis, Obama has to address the problems that the country faced in terms of the economy as soon as his presidency started. His speech was one that tried to give the American people hope that although things are bad now, he is certainly making efforts and has plans to improve the economy in the next few years in office.
ReplyDeleteAllison Latini
ReplyDeleteLike Mark said, in his State of the Union, each president speaks about a main topic which was an important issue in America at the time. Clinton discussed economic prosperity, Bush spoke about the war against terror, and Obama talked about the current economic crisis. In each State of the Union speech, the presidents are trying to project an image of strength, ambivalence, and control. I agree with Briana that the main idea of the speech is to “create unity and enthusiasm.” They all want to show America, as well as the world, that they know how to handle the issues before them. Each president tries to appear friendly and relatable to the open public. All three presidents employ the words “we” and “fellow Americans/citizens” in order to include the whole population. They all make a consistent effort to include everyone. Obama, for example, makes reference to high school students getting college acceptance letters. Clinton makes it clear that unemployment rates are low for each minority race in society. This focus on inclusion shows that the president wants the world to view America as a cohesive, strong nation that is not to be trifled with. They also want to make American citizens feel like they are being taken care of-the president wants the citizens to be glad that they have elected him. I think that the facial expressions and gestures used by the presidents are also noteworthy. Clinton smiles a lot and uses hand gestures to express the gratitude that Americans should feel for such prosperity. His open and happy demeanor helps him to gain favor with the audience. Obama and Bush are much more serious. Bush seems a bit closed-off with his serious expression. However, he uses hand gestures to emphasize his points, which effectively conveys the enormity of each word to the audience. Obama, similarly serious, seems a bit more open than Bush. Although he does not smile as Clinton did, he opens up his arms a lot when he gestures, as if to invite the general public to listen to his ideas. Obama, Clinton and Bush all want to sway the audience to see their individual points of view. In order to do this, they each try to sound triumphant when talking about a cause. Former President Bush speaks exultantly when talking about the “might of the U.S. and military” in order to gain more support for the war and the army. Former President Clinton speaks with the same vigor when he tells the public what a wonderful economic state the country is in. Clinton does this so that he will be remembered as a great president who brought prosperity to the American people. Obama speaks in a similar tone when saying the encouraging words “we will rebuild, we will recover, and emerge stronger.” The whole point of the state of the union is to give a basic re-cap of the major events that have happened in America, and to encourage and motivate Americans to work hard and to trust in the president and his government. All in all, I feel that each president is successful in conveying his emotions and goals for the future to the country.
There are numerous commonalities in these State of the Union Addresses, despite the differences in circumstances each president faced. I think Sal was completely right in saying these speeches are designed to get the nation's spirits up, and to try and prevent people from worrying because their president has things all under control. President Clinton mostly concentrated on past achievements. By rattling off positive statistics about the economy and culture of the current American society, he gave himself the credibility of an extremely effective leader. The other two presidents were not fortunate enough to have such great circumstances. President Bush had the task of motivating the American people to fight for justice, and I believe he did a good job of that. He provided an excellent argument as to why he sent our soldiers to war, because no person in their right mind would want to be living under an oppressive government. The fact that he emphasized America will be working with the Afghan government to combat terrorism definitely broadened his support, because he made it clear that this war was not about senseless violence and revenge for the 9/11 attacks. Finally, President Obama had to face one of America's worst economic recessions. Everyone in the nation was in despair and needed some solutions as to what was going to be done. Although vague, President Obama delivered these solutions, however I believe he was just saying what the people wanted to hear (as all other presidents have). I noticed that in all three speeches, at one point, each president said "my fellow Americans". I think this is a great rhetoric strategy, as it is an attempt at putting a figure of high authority in line with those he legislates over. This is important, because no citizen will want to listen to a seemingly uncaring leader. It is imperative to show you will do everything you can in the best interest of the American people, because you are a citizen yourself.
ReplyDeleteEach president used the State of the Union Address to reassure the public that the nation was in good standing. They all try to highlight the positive aspects of the nation under their presidency while making further promises for a stronger future. Clinton and Bush's speeches were strikingly similar in that they both claimed that the "state of the union has never been stronger." President Obama's speech seemed to deviate from Bush's and Clinton's in that he addressed the hardships and difficulties faced by Americans during his presidency. While Bush and Clinton focused on reminding people of the positive aspects, Obama reassured people that there will be solutions to our current problems. In the end, each president effectively reassured the nation by addressing relevant topics of the time and giving hope for a brighter future.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to what Jenn stated, each of the Presidents used the State of the Union address to not only give congress his future agenda, but explain to America the reason he was voted into office. Clinton, Bush, and Obama each had very different circumstances to discuss- Clinton clearly having the best end of the deal with so much prosperity during his term- and each used the address to explain to the American people what they would be doing for the remainder of their presidency. As Cheslea stated, Clinton had a much different tone than his successors due to the nation's accomplishments. When Bush gave his address, he opened with the same greeting to the Speaker of the House, the Vice President, the Congress members, and the "distinguished guests" but after that, his speech was completely different from Clinton's. Bush, unfortunately for him, was president during the 9/11 attack and the war on terrorism, causing his name to be tied to some of the most horrific events in American history. During this address, Bush is in his first of two terms, and uses this speech to explain his fight against terrorism. He used this speech to instill hope into the American people and give them confidence. Clinton took a very different approach. He was much more relaxed and discussed his past success, since he was in his final term and didn't need to make any future plans. Obama took an approach similar to Bush’s, even though he is in the same house as Clinton. Obama has been faced with difficult times as well, with the credit crisis and a continuing recession. All three of the presidents used an anecdote to help their argument. They each caught the attention of the listeners by giving, what would seem to be an insignificant story but really ends up illustrating how these problems affect everyone. Each of the presidents used the State of the Union address to, not only explain their agenda to Congress, but to give the American citizens a reminder of why they voted him into office.
ReplyDeleteMy last minute students: nothing like getting an assignment done at 11:50 PM the night it's due! (Haha) my iPad has been beeping all night.
ReplyDeleteGoing off of what Eddie said above, the State of the Union Address is made to be an uplifting speech to give the American citizens hope for the future of the country. In Clinton's case, he spoke of how strong the economy was and how unemployment was at a 30 year low and that African American and Latino unemployment was the lowest it had ever been. He also says that the country is enjoying its longest period of economic prosperity in its 224 years of existence. He gives the citizens and Congress hope for the future when he says that the economy is still growing and that American will enjoy this prosperity for many years to come. He also fails to address any potential problems that could occur. Bush then spoke about the horrific losses in 9/11 and about the recession the country was facing just a few years later. Although he addresses these problems, he gives the citizens hope by saying how we had overthrown a tyrant government and how the citizens of that country were rejoicing. By saying that we were rebuilding the Pentagon and New York City showed that the country was united and would continue to stay strong and fight terrorism for many years to come. Also by saying this, Bush was able to show real proof that what he was saying was true. Lastly, Obama's speech was the hardest hitting as it was almost all negative. However, despite the credit crisis, he had the passing of legislation to stimulate the economy to show that the future was in fact bright and that we had something to look forward too. All of these speeches had an uplifting tone in common as they all showed that our country was strong and united despite major events such as the stock market crash and the terrorist attacks on 9/11. All three presidents achieved their purpose of giving hope to the American citizens that the future was bright for our country and that we were on the right track by giving us some examples of what the government was doing to fix it.
ReplyDeleteI truly hate this blog with all my heart. I hate everything about computers in general. I have been wasting the last hour of my life trying to log on. I have had a problem with it all year and assignments are meant to be done with pens and paper. It's not you, Mr. Bachman, it's me and my complete stupidty when it comes to something technological. That being said...I would have to agree with Luca (and I use Luca because I had written this earlier and copied this post and saved it anticipating something would go wrong). All three presidents make it a point to say "The State of the Union is strong". They all seem to higlight the positive aspects of our nation and try to mitigate the effects of the severe state of our struggles. Every president mentions the strengths of the nation at the time of his speech and try to persuade the American people that we have never been stronger. Obviously, some false-hood lies in those statements. The differences in the speeches lied in the extreme differences of the nation at the time. Clinton had a relatively easy and uplifting speech. We've never been better. There's not too much more he needed to say. Bush's speech was different in that he could not ignore the deteriorating state of our nation. But he greatly downplayed the struggling economy and concentrated more on the war in Iraq. Obama's speech was depressing. There was no ignoring the obvious struggling state of the nation and most importantly the fact that our economy was heading in a downward spiral. His spirits remained high though. The goal is to get out what information you can and not send the American people into a panic. I should also mention that Tori has made some great key points via text message and helped me throughout this post. She is just such a bright individual and offers ecellent insight into US Government and is a master in the affairs of The State of the Union. That is all, good night.
ReplyDeleteThat's alot to process
DeleteDespite the striking differences among these three Presidents, there are various commonalities that can be seen in their speeches. As Gianluca mentions in his response, the presidents deliver State of the Union Addresses that “highlight the positive aspects of the nation,” especially during their presidencies. Clinton, Bush, and Obama have different methods of revealing these positive aspects, but I agree with Gianluca in that each president does try to reassure the people, despite the issues the country has faced or is currently facing. Bill Clinton and George Bush both mention that, in Clinton’s words, “the state of our Union is the strongest it has ever been.” These Presidents have “the longest period of economic growth” and the assurance that “we are winning the war on terror,” respectively, on their side. As many have previously noted, Clinton points out achievements America had throughout his presidency; this is because his previous seven years in office were successful ones. President Clinton mentions a “revival of the American spirit” in addition to the period of economic growth. He gives statistics and points out that the crime rate has dropped by twenty percent, showing the people his successes in office. President Bush highlights the war on terror; however, he raises the spirit of the American people by mentioning the efforts that have been put forth and that will be continued in the years to come. He says that we have already “comforted the victims [of 9/11], begun to rebuild New York and the Pentagon, …saved a people from starvation, and freed a country from brutal oppression.” Bush also includes his desire to “lead the world toward values that will bring lasting peace.” He wants the people to agree with his efforts to fight terrorism with the military; he brings up ideals of freedom and stirs the emotions of Americans regarding 9/11. On the other hand, President Obama speaks mainly about the future and his agenda to fix the economy. He admits that the “economy is in crisis,” but he also recognizes that it is a “concern that rises above all others.” It is imperative to the American people that the economy is recovered and rebuilt as soon as possible; people cannot afford to lose their jobs. Obama mentions specific areas—energy, healthcare, and education—that he believes need to be invested in to “grow our economy” and “bring our deficit down.” Each President focuses on the most crucial issues of their terms, but Clinton highlights his past achievements, while Bush and Obama tell the American people what they plan to do in their upcoming terms.
ReplyDeleteAll three speeches were of course designed to rally the American people and garner their support. Although each speaker highlighted different things in his State of the Union, essentially they were all able to successfully inspire confidence in their leadership and presidency. Clinton had the most straightforward address because the nation was prospering so well during his term. In his speech, Clinton did not mention any negatives, and instead focused mainly on a series of impressive statistics that illustrated how the United States had reached its peak under his presidency. Clinton proudly announced how the US was currently in an era "with so little internal crises, and so few external threats," which allowed for such record-breaking feats to be accomplished by his administration. Bush and Obama would have been derided had they attempted Clinton's strategy because there were some glaring problems during their terms that could not be covered up. Both Presidents acknowledged right from the beginning the difficulties facing the citizens. But after briefly, yet empathetically, addressing them, they moved on to assure the American people that their situation would improve, that better times were near, and that the US would soon return to the height of its power. As Corrine previously mentioned, Bush focuses his State of the Union around his foreign policy accomplishments, stirring up the patriotism by challenging terrorists in the Middle East and promising to bring them to American justice. With 9/11 only four short months ago, Bush mentions the horrific tragedy to bring the nation together in order to rise again, stronger than ever. Obama employs similar strategy as Bush, where he starts off by acknowledging the recession and economic downturn, but he then lays out a detailed plan with specifics such as increasing education, jobs, and clean energy. Obama focuses on creating reforms, stating that “the time to take charge of our future is here.” All of the State of Unions were heavily applauded because they focused on aspects that could not possibly be criticized. Political analysts and speechwriters would be hard pressed to find people against creating more jobs, restoring justice, or improving healthcare.
ReplyDeleteThe immense differences between the three speeches was a result of the state of the country at that given time and the issues the president was facing. Clinton's speech was during a prosperous time for the country, he did not need to focus on any negative or state his plans to turn the future around. He was able to focus more so on stating what he was already accomplished in office and mark his legacy since his presidency was soon over. Bush on the other hand made his address during a time of a national crisis, 9/11 had just occurred, and there was a sense of panic throughout the nation. He mentioned the crisis as a way to bring the nation together with one common goal of bringing justice to terrorists. He focuses more on foregin policy. Obama's strategy is more similar to Bush since he also came into office when the country was facing hardships. He mentions the state of the economy and the current recession the country is facing but he then goes on to discuss what he plans on doing about it. He talks about his economic plans to return America to a prosperous state, ideas like clean energy, more jobs and better education. As pointed out by Robyn, all three speeches receive much applause from the audience since they focus on only positive ideas. These addresses are an attempt to unite the people. motivate them and restore confidence in their leader and his presidency.
ReplyDeleteDespite the differences among the three presidents in terms of political beliefs and the contemporary issues of their term, each President utilized the state of the union address to boost their popularity among the American people. For example, Bill Clinton used his state of the union address in 2000 to remind the American people what he had accomplished: the longest period of economic prosperity in our nation’s history, high employment rates, and low crime rates, to name a few. This speech reinvigorated the spirit of the American people and, in his final address, reminded them of how much Clinton had succeeded as the President and of all the promises he has fulfilled. However, Clinton’s 2000 state of the union was different to those made by Bush in 2002 and Obama in 2009 because he did not have to make any more promises to the American people—it was his final address and he could not run for reelection again. For Presidents Obama and Bush, presenting their goals to the American people means that they intended to do everything in their power to reach those goals. Bush utilized his state of the union in 2002 as a reaction to 9/11 and terrorism—the topic that was on every American’s mind at the time. Like Clinton, he reminded the American people what he had accomplished as a President so far: he began to rebuild New York and the Pentagon, he “captured, arrested, and rid the world” of thousands of terrorists, and he destroyed Afghanistan’s terrorist training camps. This speech was something many Americans needed to hear, whether or not they supported the President and his political views; the nation was in turmoil in this period after the 9/11 attacks, and the President’s address invoked a spirit of Patriotism and hope that was desperately needed. Bush also promises to capture each of the terrorists that were willing to sacrifice their lives to harm Americans and to partner with Afghanistan to combat terrorism. As Jean mentioned, after 9/11, Bush did live up to his promise—there was no further attacks on America by fundamentalist terrorist groups despite the threats and the fears of a potential one. Like Angela has mentioned, Bush wants the American people to agree with what he has done thus far and what he plans to do in the near future regarding terrorism in order to boost his popularity with the people and fulfill his duty as a President. President Obama, in his 2009 state of the union address, right from the start works to assuage the American people in a time of economic crisis. To inspire the citizens of America and to boost his own popularity, Obama promises to rebuild America, recover from the economic recession, and “emerge stronger than before”. Obama also promises to reform the healthcare in America—a promise that he has lived up to with the creation of Obamacare. The inspired feeling of patriotism that he imparts on the American people during a period of national crisis, much like in Bush’s state of the union address, and the promises both of these president’s have made appeal to Americans as a whole and thus increases their popularity among the majority.
ReplyDeleteIn President Clinton's State of the Union address, he highlighted major accomplishments in economic expansion and set his agenda by stating that he will continue to promote economic growth. President Bush used his State of the Union to address the panic after 9/11 but to reassure the public that safety measures were, and would continue to be taken. Like Bush, President Obama was honest in the fact that the country was not doing well. In all three addresses the Presidents set their agenda with specific measures to "strengthen the union". To respond to Rachel, I agree that the three presidents used their addresses to gain popularity with the nation. By highlighting the positives of his term and setting the agenda to fix what is not going well, the presidents are telling the country what we want to hear and therefore gaining popularity.
ReplyDeleteKatie Cooke
Each of three presidents used the State of the Union speech as a chance to reassure the nation about the progress and future of the country. Clinton proudly told the people that America was experiencing a time of great prosperity the likes of which have never been seen in American history. Bush assured the people that freedom in the world will be protected and those that wish to go against it will be sought out and brought to justice no matter what the cost. O'bama adressed the economic crisis and how he plans on turning it around. Both president Clinton and president Bush used the phrase "the union has never been stronger" to show that they have been able to bring the country closer together as a whole in times of crisis or economic prosperity.
ReplyDeleteIn concord with Rachel’s remarks, President Clinton’s address focuses on past achievements while both Bush and Obama’s address highlight future endeavors. Clinton enjoyed considerable success in his years in office in the realms of both fiscal and foreign policy. Clinton gasconades about the tremendous economic prosperity that the United States enjoyed under his administration and progress made in social reforms. Although many of Clinton’s opponents believed that this was a great deal of “braggadocio”, Clinton recognizes and refers to the rudimentary principle that “In the best interests of our nation, Americans are determined to set things right”. Clinton alleviates ideological tension by stating that “We restored the vital center, replacing outmoded ideologies with a new vision anchored in basic, enduring values: opportunity for all, responsibility from all, a community of all Americans.” Clinton, in reality does recognize the nation’s future in his sentiments about poverty, in particular the “farm bill”. In addition, Clinton mentions his advocacy of a national security budget that would drastically supplement the resources of the US armed forces, proving conservatives wrong over his unwillingness to increase defense spending. In President Bush’s address, Congress apparently lauds his statements about warfare and combating terrorism. In the wake of 9/11, many moderates adopted a more aggressive approach to military and foreign policy commonly reminiscent of left-wing conservatives. Undoubtedly, President Bush truly believed in this schema—as a conservative, this was his approach toward international affairs. Aside, Bush truly made a great attempt in eliciting emotion from the disconsolate American people. One’s reaction to his speech truly depended on his ability to make his listeners concur with the emotions that he expressed. However, he was often criticized, as may believe that the goal of this rhetoric was to boost public support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, wars that he initiated. Similar to Clinton, President Obama spoke a great deal about the past. While Clinton spoke about accomplishments during his time in office, on the other hand, Obama recognized the failures of the previous administration. He displayed condemnation over the dependency of Americans on foreign natural resources, such as oil, our rickety health care system, and rampant deficit spending. Obama proposes the theory that the welfare of the United States had been contingent on short-term solutions for too long, and that there will be a day in the future in which these indefinite solutions will not directly address and abate long-term problems. Unfortunately, many conundrums loom, especially in the realm of fiscal policy, in which tax cuts implemented by Bush extended wealthy American’s assets further. Regardless, President Obama’s speech was resumption of his historic 2008 campaign, in which he declared our nation’s state to be deficient, yet fixable via cogent reforms. However, like Bush, he tried to use the emotions of the people—their desperation regarding the recession—to create support for his agenda. Common to all three presidents was the attempt in improving their approval rates via the State of the Union. In the wake of ample success, President Clinton speech was in essence a summary of his term in office. With the ultimate goal being gaining support for the wars he created, President Bush tried to gain support for his wars, and having just taken over a country in the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, President Obama attempted to ignite reform.
ReplyDeleteAll three presidents used the State Of Union as a way to boost there popularity with the Americans as most presidents would do. However all of there speeches focused on three totally different topics. Clinton talked more about the accomplishments he has already made because the country was in such a good place. There was no need for him to make a plan and fix something when everything was going pretty well. Then you look at Bush and it's a totally different story. The time of his State of Union was right after 9/11 and the nation was sitll in crsis mode. He needed to talk more about foreign policy and bring the nation closer together. Last when you look at Obama he had to focus on the economy because of the recession. He needed to deliver some sort of plan to try and fix the economy. As what Carl said both Bush and Obama needed to foucs on the emotions of the people and find a way to make the nation feel better about everything.
DeleteEvery president attempted to use the State of the Union Address in the most effective way possible. However, as Kelly said, each strategy used was very different. Clinton focused on the prosperity and accomplishments the country had achieved under his leadership by saying "We have so little internal crisis and so few external threats." In simpler terms, Clinton basically said "Hey guys, we're awesome, and let's stay awesome!" On the other hand, Bush's speech was very different. He explained how the country had been going through some tough times, yet he emphasized the fact that "the state of our union has never been stronger." This provided Americans with a sense of confidence and security which most likely distracted them from the fact that our economy was in pretty bad shape. Finally, president Obama's speech focused on mainly the recession and its impact on the average American citizen. He stresses the fact that "we will rebuild" in order to restore the confidence in citizens that was, at the time, "still shaky." Obama's speech was focused on creating reforms that seemed reasonable at the time, but now seem unlikely.
ReplyDeleteYes I believe the American people would view a governmental compromise as a reflection of the peoples wants and needs. Because of the recent government shutdown, people will definitely be more open to compromising in order to avoid another catastrophe. However, as Kaitlyn stated before, not everyone will be satisfied with compromise if it hurts them. Even if it does avoid a governmental shutdown. But, it is the responsibility of the government to please the majority, not try to make every last person happy. There is no way for congress to act totally in reflection of the people, but it is their job to do their best. I agree with some of my classmates that political actors usually are more loyal to their political parties. The reason for this is unfortunately, most likely because they are worried about reelection and making their party happy rather than pleasing the masses. In my opinion, Congress is not interested with addressing our interests but instead interested in staying loyal to their party regardless of what the people want.
ReplyDelete