Rhetoric of MLK and Clinton

Persuasion techniques used by Martin Luther King and Hillary Clinton are used for speeches with similar goals by extremely different people. Hillary Clinton delivered a speech in September of 2007 regarding the Health care policies that she plans to implement if she becomes president. I personally do not care for another Clinton as president, but reading her speech even made me think twice because of her excellent use of rhetoric. Clinton uses pathos in her speech by telling a story of a married couple who have health problems and must sell their 30 year home in order to pay the medical bills. She introduces the topic in this way to get her audience to view healthcare from the perspective of one who supports her health care suggestions. Martin Luther King also uses pathos when he provides examples of what life is like for an African American during this time. Both of these examples provided in speeches appeal to the sympathetic and empathetic emotions of the audience.

Hillary uses ethos with a few small remarks about her husband. She indirectly reminds her audience not only of her own experience and accomplishments, but also of the fact that she has been a first lady and has experience in the White House. These remarks establish her credibility to the audience. Martin Luther King does this as well in the second paragraph of his letter when he states what his honors and leadership titles have been in his life.

Overall, Clinton's speech on the policy of universal health care is effective in persuading the audience, but not as effective as Martin Luther King, Jr.'s. MLK allows those who originally opposed his platform to become inspired. Those who have pre existing opinions of Clinton might not be as inspired by her speech. I, for example, have never cared for Hillary Clinton, and though her speech was convincing, it wasn't convincing enough to make me pro-Hillary. The letter from Birmingham jail is timeless and inspirational. The persuasion is written so well that one could find all three types of rhetoric in every part of the letter. Not being able to differentiate between these types is what makes his letter such an excellent piece of literature.