Have you ever tried to diminish someone else’s integrity entirely just to prove a point? Or maybe you just outright attack them? Or display them in black light, showing all their terrible deeds in full display? Well, there are those journalists/bloggers who break down and use those methods. The author of the blog, “Rick Perry’s Problem With The Truth” does just that. Jayde Wyatt uses plenty of low and demeaning attacks to get her audience to believe that her choice of future president is the correct one. She does a great job at proving her point to a less than intelligent audience, who are only looking for low blows to further support their ideas and thoughts and who care nothing about the means to and end, they just want the end. Ms. Wyatt schemes and low blows her way to get her readers to believe that Gov. Rick Perry is a liar and is a far worse choice than her obvious candidate, a one Mitt Romney. She attacks the former by using various forms of rhetoric; firstly by showing how he has lied and misquoted Romney, she also uses many quotes from different well-known people throughout the political spectrum, and furthers her argument by putting her opposition (Rick Perry) on display in a malicious way and exposing the lies her opponent has voiced concerning her choice (Mitt Romney). These various forms of slander work well together to persuade her one sided audience that her candidate is a far superior option than the opposition by taking down her opponent, and breaking him for all to see.
First things first, Wyatts use of Perry’s own comments on Romney’s quotes to show the audience what a liar Perry is. This is an interesting form of rhetoric she uses, one that I think is potentially very lethal. She has used a comparison of recorded statements used by both candidates. One is Perry’s version of a quote said by Mitt Romney, the other shows Romney’s actual quote:
While reading these it is easy to tell how it affects the readers. They are shown that Rick Perry is a liar by using his own words against him with a simple comparison of his and Romney’s actual words. She shows in a very interesting and blatant way that her opposing candidate has lied to the public for all to see. It is very smart of her to start her article with this view because by having actual documented proof that Perry is a liar she effectively starts her argument by showing that her ideas are not coming from nowhere and is able to show her audience (who probably don’t really need it) that Rick Perry is a liar, a scoundrel and a plain jerk, and she has the proof, right from the horse’s mouth.
Now begins her barrage on the already deceitful horse by shedding light on Perry’s inability to bring to the public eye his own misdeeds. Of course, she will kindly do so for him and her audience. Yet again she has proven herself lethal in her attacks on her unfortunate opponent. By using quotes from notable and credible news agencies such as CNN Money and The Washington Post she is able to show that not only Rick Perry can prove himself a liar, but also others can, and do. She uses four very well researched quotes to bring her buckling horse even lower into the ground. Yet upon closer study, I found it amusing that three of her four quotes are taken from the same article (CNN Money, “Texas’s Love/Hate Relationship With Washington’s Money”) that was written by the same author. For the untrained eye, this may go unnoticed, but for a trained rhetorical analyst such as myself, nothing escapes my gaze. Yet what can this mean for the audience? Well, if they are paying attention to their article, they would be able to notice that she hasn’t really done her research, and only seems to read two or three different news publications and is absolutely willing to use the same one over and over again to prove her point as long as it attacks her opponent in a certain way. Thereby weakening her argument which means a variety of things to her readers; if they are like me they will notice that she has quoted the same article twice, and that she may not have as much support for her ideals as previously thought. Or if I were to not notice it, I would think that she has a lot of support from multiple people and it strengthens her influence over my opinion.
After such a barrage on our lying, deceitful, and injured horse; to make absolutely sure that this horse ends up getting shot, she continues her attack on him by again using various quotes that, in her words, “display [Perry’s] problem – the TRUTH”. She now has stated her obvious meaning behind her attacks; Rick Perry needs to tell the truth. Her first quote attacks Perry’s campaign methods and to do so, she uses a quote from The Washington Post which adds to her display of this obvious liar who continuously “[runs] into a problem – the TRUTH”. The following quote comes from a website called, FactCheck.org, a website that is non-partisan and aims at reducing the levels of deception in American politics and is highly effective in this case for strengthening her argument against Perry.
“Perry falsely claimed Romney had once written that ‘Romneycare’ is ‘exactly what the American people needed.’ Romney never wrote that. On the contrary, he said after he signed the bill that ‘certain aspects’ of the state’s law might work ‘better in some states than others.’”(FactCheck.org, 9/23/11)
By using such a notable source that routinely blows people lies up in their face, she effectively demonstrates that it is not just her that says Perry is a liar, but another non-profit, non-partisan organization also has found lies just oozing from our now lame and deceitful horse lying in his own bed of lies.
As we can see, Jayde Wyatt has done an effective job at using various forms of rhetoric to add to and strengthen her case to destroy a devious horse in the race for GOP candidacy. By using these various forms of rhetoric, her audience has now been effectively shown that Rick Perry is a liar and a scoundrel. It certainly is no mistake that she comes out with this article at such a crucial time when Romney and Perry come so close in the GOP polls. But thanks to her we, if only a few, have been successfully warded off from a lying candidate. So what do we have now besides a horse that is lying lame in his stall? We have an author who has effectively used different forms of rhetoric to tear down her opponent. Yet, has she been effective in her cause to convince her followers that Romney is the better stallion in the race? Well, by using the imagery already in place, who would I pick? A stallion I have been told nothing about, or a stallion that has been deemed lame. I would take my chances on the stallion I have been told nothing about, and just hope that he’s not dead.