Rhetorical Analysis

In a "Brief Encounter," the unidentified author writes to readers of the Economist, admonishing them about talk that is not backed up by action. According to the author, Barrack Obama's first ten days in office have been very partisan and one-sided, contrary to his bipartisan campaign rhetoric when he once remarked, "the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply." The author, however, using a myriad of logos, cites frequent action taken by Barrack Obama underscoring the lack of Republican popularity thus far. For example, in paragraph five, he comments about how the stimulus bill passed the House of Representatives without one Republican vote on January 28th. This article also addresses pathos because the author is rather critical of Obama, whose popularity is through the roof.

Despite his obvious criticism of Obama, he does not omit counterexamples. He cites Republican shortcomings, for example, in paragraph 4, where he castigates them for turning a surplus created by the Democrats into a deficit within a few years. Also, in the last paragraph, where he reiterates his thesis, he comments about how the Republicans will vote against the stimulus package they know will pass--commensurate to the partisan politics of the last twenty years. Therefore House Republicans are acting just as obstinate, however, the only difference is they didn't run a campaign based on a platform of bipartisan consensus.

This is a typical closed essay where the thesis was stated at the beginning, particulars were mentioned in the middle paragraphs, and the thesis was reiterated at the very end. The audience is those who read the Economist, particularly those interested in politics. His purpose was to inform the reader about the reality of what has thus transpired in our country's capital since Barrack Obama was elected as our 44th president. The thesis is that politics has been very partisan since January 20th despite Obama's rhetoric promising the American people otherwise.