George Washington :Prevents a Revolt from his Officers

Gentlemen:

By an anonymous summons, an attempt has been made to convene you together; how inconsistent with the rules of propriety, how unmilitary, and how subversive of all order and discipline, let the good sense of the army decide...

Thus much, gentlemen, I have thought it incumbent on me to observe to you, to show upon what principles I opposed the irregular and hasty meeting which was proposed to have been held on Tuesday last - and not because I wanted a disposition to give you every opportunity consistent with your own honor, and the dignity of the army, to make known your grievances. If my conduct heretofore has not evinced to you that I have been a faithful friend to the army, my declaration of it at this time would be equally unavailing and improper. But as I was among the first who embarked in the cause of our common country. As I have never left your side one moment, but when called from you on public duty. As I have been the constant companion and witness of your distresses, and not among the last to feel and acknowledge your merits. As I have ever considered my own military reputation as inseparably connected with that of the army. As my heart has ever expanded with joy, when I have heard its praises, and my indignation has arisen, when the mouth of detraction has been opened against it, it can scarcely be supposed, at this late stage of the war, that I am indifferent to its interests.

But how are they to be promoted? The way is plain, says the anonymous addresser. If war continues, remove into the unsettled country, there establish yourselves, and leave an ungrateful country to defend itself. But who are they to defend? Our wives, our children, our farms, and other property which we leave behind us. Or, in this state of hostile separation, are we to take the two first (the latter cannot be removed) to perish in a wilderness, with hunger, cold, and nakedness? If peace takes place, never sheathe your swords, says he, until you have obtained full and ample justice; this dreadful alternative, of either deserting our country in the extremest hour of her distress or turning our arms against it (which is the apparent object, unless Congress can be compelled into instant compliance), has something so shocking in it that humanity revolts at the idea. My God! What can this writer have in view, by recommending such measures? Can he be a friend to the army? Can he be a friend to this country? Rather, is he not an insidious foe? Some emissary, perhaps, from New York, plotting the ruin of both, by sowing the seeds of discord and separation between the civil and military powers of the continent? And what a compliment does he pay to our understandings when he recommends measures in either alternative, impracticable in their nature?

I cannot, in justice to my own belief, and what I have great reason to conceive is the intention of Congress, conclude this address, without giving it as my decided opinion, that that honorable body entertain exalted sentiments of the services of the army; and, from a full conviction of its merits and sufferings, will do it complete justice. That their endeavors to discover and establish funds for this purpose have been unwearied, and will not cease till they have succeeded, I have not a doubt. But, like all other large bodies, where there is a variety of different interests to reconcile, their deliberations are slow. Why, then, should we distrust them? And, in consequence of that distrust, adopt measures which may cast a shade over that glory which has been so justly acquired; and tarnish the reputation of an army which is celebrated through all Europe, for its fortitude and patriotism? And for what is this done? To bring the object we seek nearer? No! most certainly, in my opinion, it will cast it at a greater distance.

For myself (and I take no merit in giving the assurance, being induced to it from principles of gratitude, veracity, and justice), a grateful sense of the confidence you have ever placed in me, a recollection of the cheerful assistance and prompt obedience I have experienced from you, under every vicissitude of fortune, and the sincere affection I feel for an army I have so long had the honor to command will oblige me to declare, in this public and solemn manner, that, in the attainment of complete justice for all your toils and dangers, and in the gratification of every wish, so far as may be done consistently with the great duty I owe my country and those powers we are bound to respect, you may freely command my services to the utmost of my abilities.

While I give you these assurances, and pledge myself in the most unequivocal manner to exert whatever ability I am possessed of in your favor, let me entreat you, gentlemen, on your part, not to take any measures which, viewed in the calm light of reason, will lessen the dignity and sully the glory you have hitherto maintained; let me request you to rely on the plighted faith of your country, and place a full confidence in the purity of the intentions of Congress; that, previous to your dissolution as an army, they will cause all your accounts to be fairly liquidated, as directed in their resolutions, which were published to you two days ago, and that they will adopt the most effectual measures in their power to render ample justice to you, for your faithful and meritorious services. And let me conjure you, in the name of our common country, as you value your own sacred honor, as you respect the rights of humanity, and as you regard the military and national character of America, to express your utmost horror and detestation of the man who wishes, under any specious pretenses, to overturn the liberties of our country, and who wickedly attempts to open the floodgates of civil discord and deluge our rising empire in blood.

By thus determining and thus acting, you will pursue the plain and direct road to the attainment of your wishes. You will defeat the insidious designs of our enemies, who are compelled to resort from open force to secret artifice. You will give one more distinguished proof of unexampled patriotism and patient virtue, rising superior to the pressure of the most complicated sufferings. And you will, by the dignity of your conduct, afford occasion for posterity to say, when speaking of the glorious example you have exhibited to mankind, "Had this day been wanting, the world had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining."

George Washington - March 15, 1783

George Washington is addressing military officers who may potentially revolt during the Revolutionary War who also served with Washington in that war at some time..

Watco revolting against the war on our success in freedom as a nation? Revolting against the war will lead this nation into destruction and faliure because revolting against the war will make the cause for freedom cease.

The first thing George Washington does in his address is use pathos to persuade his officers to give up this useless attempt to revolt against the war. He uses the emotion of having to fend of armies from family and loved ones. Without their effort in the war, every one would be fending off armies on their own. He also plays on the feeling of emotion. He has his audience reflect on the feeling of being free from tyranny. He also reminds them of their obedience to him and his every order while at war and the honor that it brought them.

George Washington also addresses his audience with logos. He reads them a letter from a writer who says that they should give up the war and flee to open territories. Washington points out how dumb this idea was. If they were to flee,they would not have accomplished anything and everyman would be for themselves and the free country the were trying to create would not be created. He argues that fighting is the only way to gain their designs and win the victory. He also exclaims to his officers that he has been there to fight and start this country from the beginning and he wouldn't have done so if he didn't believe that this cause was of importance. Stopping the war will not bring freedom to our doorsteps, but farther from it.

I think Washington has sufficient evidence for his argument. His logic and pathos is sufficient to support his evidence that leaving the war will only lead them to their destruction. He keeps his argument short, yet powerful and addresses only the most important things to them.

I think Washington is effective in his argument, not only because Washington persuades his men to not revolt, but also because of his craft in his speech. His speech was effective especially for his audience.

RA Music Video

Postal Service
We will become Sillouettes

Audience: Concerned Latter Day saints who think they can sufficiently store enough food and water to survive a nuclear holocaust.

What are the consequences of storing enough food on your survival in a nuclear holocaust?

Storing enough food will not do any good for you in a nuclear holocaust because storing enough food won't protect your skin from melting.

Jared Hess begins his argument in an LDS living room. We see doily pillows and the family tree in pictures all over the wall. He takes us to shelves of canned food and jars of peaches. We see a rack of silver spoons, a collection only LDS mothers have. We also see a sewing machine as it is sewing clothes together. He plays heavily on this ethos of the typical Mormon family who his preparing for the destruction of the world. AS LDS memebers we are all very familiar with these things. If not in our own families, our grandparents have these things in their homes. As we see this typical family living together and being happy, we feel that the director knows a little about what he is talking about.

Even though Jared's footage doesn't relate to what the singer is saying, I think it is relevant to his argument. He shows cupboards of food and canned fruit, but he doesn't show us what we hear him saying will happen. While the singer is singing about how the news reporter said not to go outside today or your insides will explode, he and his family are riding their bikes down the empty street. We see him talking about how we are all going to die and our bodies will decompose and we see him and his son eating dried fruit together and having a good time. Yeah, you won't survive a nuclear holocaust, thats why you need to pay attention to whats important right now, your family.

I feel that in Jared's argument we have sufficient information. In fact if he would have continued I think it would have been drawn out and whipping the dead horse. The fact that he ends the music video on a scene similar to Man's Search for Happiness, as the sun is setting and the family is gathered together, we know that he wants us to understand that no preparation will save us from a nuclear war and that we should focus on family as the most important thing and we shouldn't take it for granted. Its very simple and there is just the right ammount of information.

I feel that this argument works well, because he is showing these Latter Day Saints that they can't survive, but he is also saying how important it is to have faith that everything will work out and that we need to appreciate what we do have in this moment. It is very effective.

RA Song

(Ignore the video)
The Luckiest by Ben Fold

Audience: Ben Fold's wife.

Watco of knowing you on my happiness.

knowing you makes me really happy because knowing you makes me the luckiest.

Ben Fold relies on pathos to persuade his wife of his love. He sings, "Now I know all the wrong turns, the stumbles and falls have brought me here." He wants his wife to feel sorry for him falling the whole way, but also a sense destiny that his failures in life have led him to her. He wants her to feel that destiny and that they belong. Two other emotions he wants her to feel is companionship and commitment. He sings about an old man who passes away and his wife stays at his side for a couple of days but soon follows him to the grave. Ben wants his wife to know that he wants that same feeling of companionship and commitment to grow old together.

Ben Fold uses logos in his argument that he is the luckiest because he gets to see her face everyday. He explains how lucky he is by relating their life together to an old couple who dies together. His logic is that they are so young and they still have a lot to live for and that is another reason why he is the luckiest which makes him super happy. He argues that his life had no meaning before he met her. Proof of this is this line, "where was I before the day when I first saw your pretty face." Now his life is complete because of her.

Although most of his imformation is irrelevant to his argument, I think it makes his argument stronger. By all the nonsense he usestalking to his wife, he is saying to her hey I love you so much and I don't know how to tell you. I think it is very effective for this piece. He wants her to know that he is crazy in love with her and sometimes when we are so in love, some of the things we say don't make very much sense. So although, some of it is random, it goes along with histheme, of being happy because he isthe luckiest for having her.

Ben Fold is effective in his approach and I think it works for his wife. The approach also works for day dreaming girls who are lloking for a romantic man to sweep them from their feet. Ha! Anyway, I really like his style and feel it really works.

RA Paper A

Audience: Inactive Latter Day Saints who Suffer from depression

WATCO having high levels of religious activity on your depression

Enthymeme: Having high levels of religious activity lower the rate of depression in LDS members because it expands the understanding of purpose and direction in life.

My first paper was not well developed. I discovered while anaylizing it that I don't have many credible sources. The only credible sources I have are the Mental Health America which isn't very strong for our audience, and UCLA's Spirituality in Higher Education which does some justice but not a lot. I also used Gordon B. Hinckley as a credibility. But as I think about it, inactive LDS members aren't going to listen to what he says anyway. My credibility for this paper was not very strong because the sources I used didn't reach out to my audience very well. Maybe if I narrowed my audience some more to those who suffer from depression who are actively seeking for help and willing to change to be more happy, then my credibility would work.

The logic I use in my paper is weak. You are depressed because you go to church. If this is true, I need to have some strong background holding it up. It is very weak to make that assumption without something logical to back it up. If you don't go to church you will suffer from depression because you will feel bad for not doing something you know you should do. that is a better argument, I still think I can make it stronger. AS it sits now, the argument that not going to church makes you depressed because you don't understand your direction in life does not really make sense. I think a little more clarification could make this work.

I feel that the information I present is relevant. Yes this is how you can overcome depression. These are symptoms and feelings you will have from depression. However I think I could use these relevant topics and information to support my argument better. We know that depression can be caused by feelings of loneliness. Well, if you go to church, there are people there to talk to. Often times your ward really feels like aq second family to you. You can rely on others to help stay away from adicting substances like alcohol and drugs that also cause depression. When we learn to put our cares on our savior Jesus Christ and rely on his atonement, we can have peace of mind and be at one because going to church aligns our will with his will making us one with him. It is relevant, it just needs to be tied in better.

I feel that my argument initially wasn't effective because it lacked conciseness, narrowed audience, and beter logic, but I think that it can all become a powerful apper if I chaqnge these things. If I narrow my audience I can make more bold decisions on what aspects I want to approach and support. My relevant information will become more important as I tie it into the paper better.

RA Research Article 2

http://www.eff.org/pages/customer-always-wrong-users-guide-drm-online-music/

Audience: Law abiding music Consumers who don't know about Digital rights management(DRM) and think they own the music they purchase.

Watco of implementing DRM on your satisfaction as a consumer?

Implementing DRM dissatisfies you as a consumer.
Because implementing DRM makes the customer always wrong.

The EFF uses company names that all music consumers know to give ethos to his argument. They talk about how these companies, Itunes, Microsoft, Real Music Store, and Napster, all have some sort of DRM in their music sells. Yeah, they are somewhat supportive to their customers, but they still put restrictions on how many computers you can place your music on. They state that Itunes puts a restriction of how many times you can burn a song on DVD and how many mp3 devices you can use to listen to your music. All the popular music selling companies are doing it. The ethos in this article gives undeniable credit to the argument because everyone who buys music online has purchased at least once from Itunes wide variety of titles. They also either use Itunes or Windows media player.

The title to this article is very upsetting. "The Customer is always wrong." Aren't you frustrated with these stupid restrictions. It makes me upset. I bought the music, I want to feel free to do whatever I please with it, so long as I am not giving to others for free. Eff plays on this emotion through out their whole article talking about how our rights as consumers are diminished and and we don't own the music, we own the ability to listen to the music. They use the emotion of dissatisfaction constantly. The article gives an example of a record company coming to your home and replacing your CD with one that doesn't work in CD player.

Law abiding music fans get less for their money. In an attempt to protect their investments, they are making honest consumers punish. They just assume everyone is dishonest. The logic is good. It makes me even more upset to hear this logic. I think most people are honest and try their hardest to do what is right. They advise that before making any purchase, we should consider the DRM the company of whom we are to purchase from supports.

I think his argument is effective and makes perfect sense.

RA Movie Trailer

Audience: Middle aged men and women looking for adventure and mystery with a spicy bit of romance.

WATCO watching The Maltese Falcon on your satisfaction in life?

Buying The Maltese Falcon will make you more happy because watching the Maltese Falcon will throw you into a new adventure full of treasure, greed and romance.

The one thing The Maltese Falcon mentioned the most, was the characters in the movie. Humphrey Bogart is ethos. He is popular, all the woman love him, and all the men want to be like him. "Who is this man?" They draw attention to him as a person with this simple phrase. Buy this movie because Humphrey Bogart is in it. I forgot completely what the movie was about, I wanted to go see Humphrey Bogart. It comtniues with phrases such as, "He makes crime a career and Ladies a Hobbie." The firststatement is directed to the woman about crime being a career. Women like men that live in the danger zone. The second peice of ethos, "and makes women a hobbie" is mostly drawn to the men as it is telling the men that Humphrey Bogart is a real Man and knows how to get the woman. It is true, Humphrey Bogart is the man and can get away with anything he does. Other charcters like, Peter Lorre and Marry Astor. These actors give them film its credibility. I think they did a great job with ethos. I really forgot about the story being told, I wanted to go see the actors.

The Authors really played on their audiences pathos. You want love? Come find it in this movie. There are many kissing scenes with Humphrey Bogart. Everyone wants to find romance, a little adventure, and kiss exotic girls or guys (for the women). They play on the emotion of a simple woman, a nobody, finding romance from Humphrey Bogart, even you can. Another form of pathos important to the trailer is the pleasure and satisfaction that comes from doing detective work and finding the bad guys and fighting crime. There is a great thrill in it all and I think most men, trapped in their ervyday ordinary lives, don't get that kind of action often. It has an exciting feel to it which really makes the Movie Trailer capture their attention.

The argument in this Movie trailer was logical. If you watch this movie, you will be satisfied. I have mentioned all of the different aspects in this movie. I really like their argument because, their logos fits into both the ethos and the pathos of the picture. If you watch Humphrey Bogart do this and this, you will be satisfied. If you watch him fight crime, you will be excited about detetcive work and you will long to be there. It all fits in real nicely and thats why I thinkthis argument is so good. Everything ties together well. Like I jmentioned before, After watched this commercial, I didn't care what the story wa sabout, I wanted to go because Humphrey Bogart was in it and because there was crime, fighting, kissing, and I was excited about it. I wanted to live an exciting life like that!

RA Encouter

I walked into an AT&T store to look for a possible solution to my faulty phone. A male in his mid 20's helped me.

Audience: Me, a student with a broken cell looking to buy a new one.

What are the consequences of buying an AT&T phone from this store on my satisfaction of AT&T.
Buying an AT&T phone from this store will leave me highly satisfied with AT&T service because buying and AT&T phone from this store is convenient.

Aaron, the guy helping me at AT&T, wanted me to buy a phone from his store. He was not very successful, and he did not sell me on his rhetoric. The first approach to persuade me was ethos. He talked about the big name brands in his store. He talked about the apple and Blackberry phones. Everyone knows these two companies have solid products that work great. But not only did he introduce me to the top name brand products, whose cost was at least two times greater than other phones, but he first introduced me to their "Hot Buys" which are the most popular phones, and which most people buy. "We have a great deal on this phone!", he said. I am not a guy who likes to follow the norm, so the credibility that everyone loves this phone did not appeal to me. I thought it was ugly. He also talked about how these phones now have internet connection and I could find myself on mapquest. I like the Blackberry phone, but he just didn't hit the right features for me.

His first approach wasn't working too well, so he switched it to logos. This particular store didn't have the Apple iphone. He assured me that the i phone wasn't very good. He said that is complicated and difficult to use. A more friendly and easier to use phone would be the Blackberry because it has a full keyboard for texting and it can do all the things iphones can do, but ti has more stoarge and you can upgrade to bigger storage cards. The iphone costs 200 dollars. the blackberry costs 500 dollars, but if you buy a plan with the phone, the cost of the Blackberry is on 150 dollars and the service plan is cheaper. He showed me his ipod touch and said I love this machine, but I couldn't imagine it being a phone. Its seems to be more complacate. That was his whole arguement. He was successful in arguing hat the Blackberry was a better model and I agreed with him, but his rhetoric just wasn't strong enough for me to buy the phone.

His argument seemd typicalof someone in his job. I just wasn't impressed without his reasons for picking one phone over the other. It seemed to much that he was trained to say something to get me to buy a more expensive phone. I want an argument not so typical. Give me something I won't expect and push me off balance. I was very much in charge of the conversation because I knew where he was going with the persuasian and what things he was goign to say. I feel that if you want to have control in a conversation, you need to bring in elemnets that arent thought of often and also you need to do it in an interesting way. Aaron was just too predictable and it didn't work for me.

Aaron's argument was successful in persuading me to buy a blackberry becuase I feel that it is a good phone, however, he failed in his argument to get me to buy from him. He did not offer me anything inparticular. I value qauloity over convenience and I want to buy from a store where they know a lotabou the product I am buying so they can educate me. i felt I succeeded him knowledge on somethings which did not impress me. I will not buy from that shop even though it is convenient because I want a company whose workers can "wow" me.