September 20, 2001 and the U.S. response to terrorism: George W. Bush discovers rhetoric

doi:10.1075/aic.7.12ch12

In:Political Argumentation in the United States: Historical and contemporary studies
David Zarefsky
[Argumentation in Context 7] 2014
► pp. 233–254

Get fulltext from our e-platform

Download Book PDF

George W. Bush discovers rhetoric

September 20, 2001 and the U.S. response to terrorism

Published online: 24 September 2014

https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.7.12ch12

From the insight that Americans have an ambivalent attitude about rhetoric but demand it of the president in times of national crisis, the essay examines the response of President George W. Bush to the terrorist attacks of 2001, focusing especially on his speech to a joint session of Congress on September 20. The speech clearly reflects a definition of the situation as war, a choice Bush made immediately and instinctively. Several rhetorical moves are evident in the speech, including distinguishing the war on terrorism from other wars, marginalizing the enemy, forcing all nations to choose sides, minimizing the sacrifice required, and forecasting inevitable victory. The speech was successful in responding to the immediate situation, but it invited long-term risks, ranging from threatening civil liberties to encouraging copycat behavior by other nations and limiting the maneuvering room of the United States.

References (38)

Apple, R.W. Jr. (2001). A clear message: I will not relent. New York Times, September 21, p. A1.

Broder, D.S. (2001). Echoes of Lincoln. Washington Post, September 25, p. B7.

Bruni, F. (2001). Bush, and his presidency, are transformed. New York Times, September 22, p. B2.

Brzezinski, Z. (2002). Confronting anti-American grievances. New York Times, September 1, sec. 4, p. 9.

Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Bush’s remarks on U.S. military strikes in Afghanistan. (2001). New York Times, October 8, p. B6.

Cohen, R. (2001). Taking command. Washington Post, September 22, p. A9.

Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic uses of politics. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

. (1971). Politics as symbolic action. Chicago: Markham.

Farrell, T.B. (1993). Norms of rhetorical culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Greenstein, F.I. (2000). The presidential difference: Leadership style from FDR to Clinton. New York: Free Press.

Griffin, L.M. (1984). When dreams collide: Rhetorical trajectories in the assassination of President Kennedy. Quarterly journal of speech, 70:111–131.

Hargrove, E.C. (1998). The president as leader: Appealing to the better angels of our nature. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

Hoffman, S. (2002). America alone in the world. The American prospect,13:20. September 23.

“Islam is peace,” says president. (2001). Available at [URL] September 17. (Visited on November 13, 2002).

Kohn, R.H. (2001). A war like no other. Organization of American Historians newsletter, 29:4. November.

MacFarquhar, N. (2002). Egypt assails the lumping of U.S. war with Israel’s. New York Times, May 1, p. A11.

Max, D.T. (2001). The making of the speech. New York Times Magazine, October 7, pp. 32, 34–37.

McGrory, M. (2001). Leaders in the breach. Washington Post, September 13, p. A2.

McPherson, J.M. (1991). Abraham Lincoln and the second American revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.

Miller, M.C. (2001). The Bush dyslexicon: Observations on a national disorder. New York: Norton.

Mitchell, A. (2002). The perilous search for security at home. New York Times, July 28, sec. 4, p. 4.

Parry-Giles, T. & Parry-Giles, S. (2002). Presidential therapies and the events of September 11: Mimesis, methexis, and nationalism in the rhetorics of George W. Bush and The West Wing . Paper presented at the 8th biennial Public Address Conference, University of Georgia.

President Bush’s address on terrorism before a joint meeting of Congress. (2001). New York Times, September 21, p. B4.

President’s Remarks. (2001). New York Times, September 15, p. A6.

Safire, W. (2001). On language: Words at war. New York Times Magazine, September 30, p. 26.

Sanger, D.E. (2002). Hard choices for Bush. New York Times, April 1, p. A1.

Schmemann, S. (2002). After months of war, long fights still to wage. New York Times, May 26, sec. 4, p. 4.

Sciolino, E. (2001). Bush tells the military to “get ready”: Broader spy powers gaining support. New York Times, September 16, p. A1.

Seelye, K.Q. & Bumiller, E. (2001). Bush labels aerial terrorist attacks “acts of war.” New York Times, September 13, p. A16.

Sontag, S. (2002). Real battles and empty metaphors. New York Times, September 10, p. A31.

Starr, P. (2002). 9-11, One year later. The American Prospect, 13:2. September 23.

Stuckey, M.E. (1991). The president as interpreter-in-chief. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

Transcript: Confronting Iraq threat “is crucial to winning war on terror.” (2002). New York Times, October 8, p. A12.

Tulis, J.K. (1987). The rhetorical presidency. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Walzer, M. (2001). First, define the battlefield. New York Times, September 21, p. A27.

Witt, H. (2002). Terror war has U.S. in dubious alliances. Chicago Tribune, September 4, sec. 1, p. 1.

Zarefsky, D. (1998). Definitions. In Argument in a time of change: Definitions, frameworks, and critiques (J.F. Klumpp, Ed.), pp. 1–11. Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.