Page 82 - Cultural Studies A Practical Introduction

66 Rhetoric

these figures and McCain. To exhibit expertise is usually considered a

positive attribute, especially in a field such as politics that demands a great
deal of knowledge, but Palin appears to recast this as a liability. She argues
that voters “ knew better ” than to listen to the experts, pollsters, and
10
pundits. Why might Palin try to establish a tone of hostility toward
intellectuals? In rhetorical terms, what is she hoping to accomplish by
framing the issue in this way? With whom is the listener encouraged to
identify?
Palin very quickly moves into an account of her personal history. We
may think it common sense that a candidate for a job that will place her a
heartbeat away from the presidency would want to highlight her profes-
sional credentials and achievements, yet Palin decides to instead tell us
about her humble small - town roots, her family life, and her husband. Why
might she share such intimate details in a speech of such tremendous
importance? What role does gender play in determining the emphasis of
her remarks? Would this same strategy be effective if she was a man? How

does she communicate her social class affiliation without making explicit

reference to financial wealth? How does Palin ’ s rhetorical framing of gender
and class intersect with a conservative value system?
Palin seems to successfully reframe her limited political experience as
an asset rather than a liability. Notice how she glorifies her former duties

as a PTA mom, a city council representative, and a small - town mayor, and
devalues Obama ’ s background as a community organizer in Chicago. In
Burkean terms, how is she exploiting rhetoric ’ s capacity to promote iden-

tification through consubstantiality? With whom does she encourage the
listener to identify, who are cast as “ others, ” and why? How might these
selections function within her larger political strategy?
Another problem the Republican Party had to contend with in the elec-
tion was the public ’ s association of conservatism with Big Business. And
for good reason: under the Bush administration, large corporations received
massive tax cuts and virtually unfettered access to the wealth made avail-
able by the Iraq War. The relationship between corporations and the
administration was so cozy that in some instances corporate lobbyists
were literally writing government policy. This did not sit well with many
Americans, and the electorate seemed eager to rid Washington of corporate
interests. McCain, however, supported Bush ’ s tax cuts and wished to make
them permanent. As a matter of ideological principle, McCain believed in
“ small government, ” the idea that the government should play as little
role as possible in the lives of citizens and economic institutions.