Bruni 1 Reconstructing An Image With Ethos As the Presidential debates continue and the Election of 2012 approaches, some

critics ponder whether or not Governor and Presidential candidate Mitt Romney intends on presenting a Checkers speech in order to sympathize with middle class voters. The concept of a Checkers speech dates back to the 1952 Presidential election, when California Senator Richard Nixon addressed over 60 million Americans on national television regarding presumed illegally obtained funds. Nixons Southern California campaign treasurer Dana Smith referred to donations for his future 1956 election campaign as the Fund. Such fund was used to reimburse Nixons travel expenses, which were used to rally support and give speeches across the country, as well as postages for political mailings. The famous speech focused on dismissing rumors that Nixon traded favors for monetary contributions. Although he used personal experiences to portray himself as a commoner, the hook of his argument invokes emotions from his audience as he mentions his dog Checkers. President Nixon refutes the rumors of an alleged fund by attempting to restore his image as a Vice Presidency candidate, as well as making emotional and cogent claims to his audience. The logistics behind Senator Nixons speech are to negate the argument that his funds were handled illegally, and then reconstruct his own argument as to why he is correct. Nixon uses the methods of refutation then reconstruction to conclude that he remains a viable running mate along General Dwight Eisenhower. He states in his opening paragraph that he intends not to do the usual political thing and ignore or deny charges brought against him, but instead tell the truth. Here, Nixon lays the basis for the rest of his speech, meaning he plans on telling the truth throughout his argument. By going into detail about the rumors of the illegal fund, this showcases Nixons first

Bruni 2 attempt at rebuttal. He first acknowledges that handling campaign money secretively would be illegal; he then dismisses allegations of him doing such actions by saying that none of the campaign money was for personal use. This demonstration of ethos contributes to Nixons argument because he does not ignore the subject matter, rather he address it first hand. He then contests that the purpose of the fund was to defray expenses from the Government. Finally, Nixon states that the fund was established so that taxpayers would not have to pay extra for his own campaigning agenda, such as the costs of printing paper for his speeches and trips to make political speeches. The purpose of his opening confutation was to prove that the allegations were incorrect and give substantial proof as to how they were incorrect. To continue with additional evidence, Nixon brings forth a legal audit provided by lawyers. The audit states, Senator Nixon did not obtain any financial gain from the collection of the fund. He chooses to bring outside, independent opinion because he wants the American people to know all the facts. Once again, Nixon reinforces the idea that his argument is correct and that he has nothing to hide. As he continues to explain his reasoning, he gains more credibility. One of the more prominent aspects of his Checkers Speech is the depth into which he explains his financial history. This is important in reestablishing his image, as doing so is unprecedented in the history of American politics. First, Nixon explains growing up in a modest family; he and all of his brothers worked in the family grocery store for most of their early lives. He also mentions he worked his way through college. These two statements are pertinent, as Nixon attempts to relate to the middle class America. They also evoke a sense of ethos and pathos, as he establishes that he worked throughout his life and things were not handed to him, a concept to which middle class citizens can relate. Next, Nixon indicates that

Bruni 3 after his wifes four jobs and his two jobs, their savings consist of under $10,000. All of their savings, incidentally, were all in Government bonds. He also mentions other savings, such as money from speaking engagements and some money inherited from family. All in all, the fact that his savings were miniscule clarifies that he and his wife worked for their savings and did not touch any campaign contributions. Another important part of his financial history is the assertion that he lives modestly. Nixon owns an outdated Oldsmobile and his wife does not own a fur coat. He has about $4,000 in life insurance for himself, but none for his wife and two children. He also does not have any bonds or interest in any businesses. Each of these claims strengthens his image of a common citizen, an idea to which the voting population can also relate. The fact that Nixon openly discusses his financial history is significant to reconstructing the way American citizens view him. He gives them an in-depth look at his personal life in order to shut down charges that could potentially harm his running mate Eisenhower and himself in the 1952 election. Although putting down his opponent does not strengthen his own image, their faults magnify the purpose of Nixons address to the American people. Nixon attacks his opposing Vice Presidency candidate John Sparkman by questioning his openness and honestly with the nation. He state, [they] should come before the American people as I have and make a complete financial statement as to their financial history. And if they dont, it will be an admission that they have something to hide. It is as if Nixon wants the American audience to question the Democratic opposition because they have not come and spoken openly about their finances and campaign contributions. This is a strong closing point for Nixon because it highlights that his actions are wholesome and that citizens do not have to be skeptical of his

Bruni 4 intentions any longer. Nixon concludes his argument by saying, I continued the fight because I know I was right. The logos of this statement suggest that Nixon indeed made his refutation and successfully reconstructed his argument to win over the audience. Although much of Nixons financial situations can have an emotional correlation with the audience, the reference to his dog Checker towards the end of his speech completes his argument that he is like a middle class citizen. Nixon states that he has never accepted personal contributions except his dog Checker. Although Checker is not a monetary gift that would aid Nixon in his next election, his decision to keep the dog is important in recreating his impression. He knows that if he mentions his dog, a mans best friend, in his speech, the audience will develop a new perspective on his values, viewing him as a respected man. The integration of the emotional appeal of his dog successfully changes the publics opinion of him. To conclude, with the help of emotional and logical appeals, Nixon successfully creates a positive image of himself by refuting previous accusations. He does so by straightforward honestly, frankness of his personal matters and direct suggestions to his opponent. As Nixon successfully did so, a Checkers Speech conjures emotions from the audience, thus allowing a change in opinion or image to occur. Although Governor Romney has yet to mention a dog in his speeches, the Checkers method would allow him to connect to the middle class America on an emotional and credible level.