Nixon’s resignation speech does not meet the expectations of a fitting response, as defined by Lloyd Bitzer, for the rhetorical situation he was in following the Watergate scandal. Nixon attempts to shape himself as a victim of national interest through his rhetoric in his apology, but the context of the situation were so severe that his apology was a failure, proving that Bitzer’s definition of a fitting response is correct, while Richard …show more content…
The war was the first to be screened on public television, allowing Americans to get a first-hand vision of the horrors of war. The war also had a huge negative impact on the economy. The U.S. poured $168 billion into the war. Inflation was also occurring at an alarming rate, increasing the prices of goods and devaluing the American dollar. (Vietnam War) Due to the political environment, the race for the presidency was intense, so Nixon and the Republican Party turned to espionage to defeat Democratic nominee George McGovern. It was later discovered that CREEP broke into Watergate before to steal secret documents and wiretap the phones. However, tapping the phones failed, so the men broke in again in an attempt to fix the wiretaps. …show more content…
Nixon’s rhetoric of the speech is compelled by seven reoccurring themes: that “he is quitting for the good of the country even though he would have preferred to fight, his hopes that his resignation will start the healing of the country, his regrets of injuries that he may have caused while trying to make judgments for the good of the country, thanks his supporters and the country and forgiving his enemies, elaborating on some of his most impressive accomplishments, reciting parable about giving his best and working hard, and pledging to work for peace, prosperity, justice, and opportunity”. (Wilson) Nixon’s rhetoric attempts him to display Watergate as a “tragedy”. (King)
Nixon’s speech also fully follows the rhetoric of defeat in a concession speech. The four main elements follow in this order: “the admit of defeat is a congratulatory of the winner, a call to unite behind the winner extends the loser’s initiative, the enthusiastic praise of the Democracy implicitly exonerates and legitimizes the losing campaign, and a plea to continue the fight converts defeats into a trooping for the cause and future victory”.