Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Jeremiadic-Eulogy--George-W.-Bush-S-D 👈

1. 130
1
3
0
20
A JEREMIADIC EULOGY
George W. Bush’s Defense of the Forum
Daniel M. Chick1
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
On occasion, a nation or political movement may face a threat to its core values. Such
was the case for traditional conservatives after Donald Trump won the Republican nomin-
ation and eventually the presidency. In the campaign and then as president,Trump rejected
many ideological principles of traditional conservatism, such as free trade or support for
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. One important Republican leader in Congress,
Arizona Senator John McCain, refused to capitulate to Trump’s bulldozing of the party’s
core principles and defended the tenets that had dominated conservative politics since
Reagan’s election in 1980.
Senator McCain left behind a complicated legacy after his passing, which provided an
opportunity for proponents of traditional conservatism to juxtapose his life and values to those
of Trump and his administration. At McCain’s memorial, former president George W. Bush
delivered an unexpectedly eloquent tribute doing just that. He called upon the principles
McCain symbolized to implicitly criticize Trump’s authoritarian strongman worldview and
underscore problems with the current state of argument practice local to United States con-
servatism. In so doing, Bush revealed an emerging identity crisis among conservatives who
have become divided between the party of McCain and the party of Trump. However, the
purposes served by the eulogy do not ordinarily call for such openly critical perspectives.The
eulogist ought to conform to normal, formal characteristics of the eulogy such as honoring the
departed,contemplating the meaning of their life,and in some way explaining that the deceased
lives on (Jamieson & Campbell, 1982).
Throughout the address, Bush’s critiques of Trump revealed that he did not follow the
formal characteristics of the eulogy. In praising McCain’s legacy, Bush criticized President
Donald Trump by intimating that he was a “bigot,” a bully, and a “swaggering despot” lacking
in “courage and decency” (Bush, 2018, para. 14–17). Conversely, McCain embodied a “passion
for fairness and justice,” always troubling those who might stray from the narrow path of right-
eousness (Bush,2018,para.19).Bush’s eulogy earned high praise even while openly politicizing
McCain’s legacy. CNN political analyst Julian Zelizer (2018) explained that Bush showed what
presidential leadership looks like in tough moments for the nation. He noted that,“too often,
we risk normalizing the way that PresidentTrump acts” (para. 16), yet, Bush hearkened back to
values that made the nation better than it is now. Laura King and Jackie Calmes (2018) of the
Los Angeles Times noted that Bush embodied McCain’s final wish to have a “poignant nod to
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 130
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 130 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27

2. 131
A Jeremiadic Eulogy
1
3
1
the bipartisanship he championed,” even if “it served also as a veiled yet unmistakable remon-
strance” of PresidentTrump (para. 3).What about Bush’s eulogy drove many to warmly receive
it, despite clear violations of the eulogy’s generic form?
In what follows, I propose one possible answer to this question. I argue there exists a variant
of eulogies that serves an important argumentative function in U.S. political discourse: the
jeremiadic eulogy. Former president Bush’s eulogy functioned as a jeremiadic eulogy when he
called upon addressees to return to the national values, myths, and narrative that John McCain
symbolized.Bush defined McCain as a paragon of the national covenant in order to reconstitute
standards in which deliberation in political forums will appropriately function. In the sections
that follow, I show how Bush’s eulogy functions as a jeremiadic eulogy and why this explains
the generally positive reactions to it. I then demonstrate how once dominant principles can be
undercut by changing argument practices and how advocates for those principles can use epi-
deictic contexts to reinforce them. Finally, I conclude with implications.
The Jeremiadic Eulogy
Eulogies can perform an essential argumentative function when important political figures
are remembered. For example, a political figure can use a eulogy to argue for remembrance,
reflection, and discourse which ultimately leads to action (Frank, 2014). At the national level,
important political figures, such as President Obama when he gave multiple eulogies after mass
shootings (Frank, 2014; Landau & Keeley-Jonker, 2018), use eulogies to reinforce the country’s
values currently under strain in the process of honoring the dead (Campbell & Jamieson,2008).
This value affirmation or negation is critical to the argumentative culture of the United States
since values serve as fundamental premises undergirding ideological argument.The jeremiadic
eulogy uses the legacy of the deceased to affirm these fundamental argumentative principles. It
does this through two defining characteristics.
First, the eulogist uses the death of the individual to point out a breach in core delibera-
tive norms. As Goodnight (1987) argued, norms emerge from “community traditions” that
govern how dialectic functions. Interlocutors develop norms through time by “conduct[ing]
controversy and openly struggl[ing] for power” (Goodnight, 1987, p. 429; Goodnight, Majdik,
& Kephart, 2007). Standards are often influenced by social or political trends, such as in 2016
presidential debates when expectations that candidates“lay out their positions,provide evidence
for those positions, and treat their opponent respectfully” had given way to populist outrage
and the shock-and-awe standards of reality television (Rowland, 2018, p. 90). In a jeremiadic
eulogy, the speaker demonstrates how the deceased’s principles are symbolic of a community
discourse tradition, which reinforces norms essential to a functioning deliberative forum.Then,
the speaker shows how current practices do not live up to these standards.
Second,the eulogist shows how the breach in deliberative norms can be healed by returning
to principles the deceased symbolized. Speakers can do so by appealing to epideictic contexts,
which are traditionally used to reinforce norms that are under strain.The eulogist appeals to the
jeremiad, wherein a speaker calls for a return to the covenant to reinforce national myths and
values (Berkovitch,1978).Jeremiadic rhetoric is one source of support for exceptionalism in the
United States, through which speakers lead auditors through uncertainty (Ritter, 1980), as well
as define, contextualize, and affirm a common meaning of the nation’s past (Jones & Rowland,
2005).Thus, where the standard eulogy reframes a future in which the deceased is no longer
with us,the jeremiadic eulogy looks to the past to reframe the present.The speaker asks auditors
to return to principles of deliberation the deceased symbolized, which will heal the forum and,
consequently, the breach in the covenant.
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 131
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 131 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27

3. 132
Daniel M. Chick
1
3
2
George W. Bush’s Jeremiadic Eulogy
George W. Bush enacted the jeremiadic eulogy in his tribute to McCain. He first established
a series of principles that suggested how deliberation should function in the national political
contexts, then used McCain’s legacy to characterize howTrump violated those principles. Bush
recalled the values for which the Senator stood throughout his career, explaining how people
like McCain become deeply rooted in the nation’s character.He explained,“John was,above all,
a man with a code. He lived by a set of public virtues that brought strength and purpose to his
life and to his country”(Bush,2018,para.6).McCain was“courageous”(para.7),“honest”(para.
8), and “honorable” (para. 9). He “loved freedom” (para. 10), “respected the dignity inherent
in every life” (para. 11), and “detested the abuse of power” (para. 12). Shaped by sacrifice for
and duty to the nation, John McCain’s moral code dictated a strong response to those who
mean to cause its citizens harm, of all political persuasions. No matter what a person believed,
or how they lived or identified, Bush argued that McCain’s legacy dictated that all leaders in
the United States stand up for everyone.This was McCain’s most favorable characteristic: his
ability to speak about the struggles everyday citizens faced. He was, by Bush’s estimation, the
perfect “combination of courage and decency” (para. 14). Essential to McCain’s character was
an unrivaled sense of patriotism, unwavering even in light of the drastic changes to party and
country happening around him. Regardless of how citizens of the United States or his fellow
leaders might have felt about him, McCain still believed in their best interests and consistently
spoke to the national value that citizens should be there for one another.These principles of
civility and mutual respect were once essential to deliberation in public forums and were at the
heart of McCain’s commitment to the national covenant.These were also principles thatTrump
had disavowed.
Bush drew clear distinctions between deliberative styles of McCain andTrump. Bush (2018)
explained that the Senator“always recogniz[ed] that his opponents were still patriots and human
beings” (para. 9). McCain believed that basic dignity “[did] not stop at borders and [could] not
be erased by dictators” (para. 11). Bush continued,“He could not abide bigots and swaggering
despots.There was something deep inside him that made him stand up for the little guy—to
speak for the forgotten people in forgotten places” (para. 12).To clarify the contrast between
Trump and McCain, Bush recalled an anecdote from McCain’s Naval Academy days. Bush
explained how McCain “reacted to seeing an upperclassman verbally abuse a steward.Against
all tradition, he told the jerk to pick on someone his own size. It was a familiar refrain during
his six decades of service” (para. 13). Powerful leaders of the nation were “not exempt” from
McCain’s stalwart defense of the covenant. Bush again fused remembrances of McCain’s legacy
with an implicit critique of those who transgress against the covenant, arguing, “at various
points throughout his long career, John confronted policies and practices that he believed were
unworthy of his country” (para. 18). Bush continued,“McCain would insist: We are better than
this. America is better than this” (para. 18). Bush argued that the life and legacy of McCain
should be instructive to all leaders. In contrast, Bush enthymematically attacked Trump’s rejec-
tion of national ideals and, consequently, the harm he caused to public deliberation.Aggressive,
belligerent, intolerant, and bigoted deliberation would not, and should not, be tolerated by any
U.S. citizen,especially conservatives.The implicit indictment ofTrump and the harm he caused
to the national political forum was obvious.
Bush then fulfilled the second characteristic of the jeremiadic eulogy by demonstrating a way
for the country to heal the deep wounds sustained by Trump’s election. Bush argued that the
threat posed by Trump to national values could be confronted and the breach in the covenant
healed by embracing the virtues that McCain represented once again. Bush reframed the future
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 132
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 132 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27

4. 133
A Jeremiadic Eulogy
1
3
3
of the nation, arguing that even though McCain is not with us, the country that he envisioned
would return to greatness by emulating him. He argued that McCain “saw our country not
only as a physical place or power,but as the carrier of enduring human aspirations”(Bush,2018,
para. 20). By reaffirming that aspiration, the United States could return to values, reasoned
deliberation, and a national identity in which all are welcome and equal, values undermined
by Trump. Indeed, Bush believed McCain embodied the national civic covenant that had been
undermined by Trump’s election. He explained,“America somehow has always found leaders
who were up to that task,particularly at times of greatest need.”Bush continued,“John was born
to meet that kind of challenge—to defend and demonstrate the defining ideals of our nation”
(para. 21). Bush argued that McCain was the best the United States had to offer and provided a
model for moving forward, moving from the age of Trump back to the age of McCain.
Bush also acknowledged McCain’s death in celebratory terms. He described McCain’s life
as “so vibrant and distinctive, it is hard to think of [it] as stilled. A man who seldom rested
is laid to rest. And his absence is tangible, like the silence after a mighty roar” (Bush, 2018,
para. 2). McCain’s strength, vibrance, and duty to country swept from “a tiny prison cell in
Vietnam to the floor of the United States Senate,” from “troublemaking plebe to presidential
candidate” (para. 3). By calling attention to the void left by McCain’s death, Bush transformed
McCain from lionhearted representative of the people to a mythologized public figure,officially
becoming part of the storied past of the United States. Bush also noted that while McCain had
“moved on,” the late senator “would probably not want us to dwell on it. But we are better
for his presence among us” (para. 24). Life goes on, Bush argued, and so too will the nation
because McCain’s example inspired countless others to take the mantle of responsibility. Future
generations engaged in political debate could use McCain’s legacy as a standard for ethical par-
ticipation, which will heal the deep divisions sustained by Trump.Yet still, if the nation forgets
its important mission,“John’s voice will always come as a whisper over our shoulder” (para. 22).
In remembering the life of John McCain, former President George W. Bush remembered
McCain as a fierce competitor, a courageous public servant, and an extraordinary defender of
national values. In so doing, Bush enacted the jeremiadic eulogy. Using McCain’s legacy as a
reminder of the covenant binding the nation together, he implicitly argued that the Trump
administration had violated this covenant and conservative doctrine. Bush was then able to
argue that, by returning to the way of life that McCain embodied, the break in the conserva-
tive tradition and the covenant as a whole could be mended. He spoke directly to the grieving
family, the larger community surrounding him, and the nation as a whole, in order to make
sense of McCain’s passing and what it meant for argumentative practice local to the conserva-
tive movement and, more generally, in the national political forum.With a return to values that
McCain embodied, the nation also could return to the give and take of reasoned deliberation
and move away from the intractable name-calling of a reality TV presidency.
Conclusion
In this essay, I argued that President George W. Bush presented an eloquent jeremiadic eulogy
for Senator John McCain. In situations where an important political figure has passed and there
exists great turmoil in the nation or a political movement, speakers can utilize this form of the
eulogy.The speaker first uses the death of the individual to reaffirm core deliberative norms
and demonstrate where others had violated them.Then, the speaker shows how adhering to
principles the deceased symbolized can heal the breach and return the nation to the promises
of the covenant. Former President Bush’s appeal to return to the covenant when eulogizing
McCain signifies the current state of crisis in the conservative movement and deliberative
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 133
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 133 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27

5. 134
Daniel M. Chick
1
3
4
practices more broadly. By using McCain’s legacy to reaffirm the national covenant, Bush
pointed to how conservatives could return to foundational values and restate a commitment to
reasoned deliberation.
One implication of this essay concerns why argument functions poorly in the contem-
porary conservative discourse community. Standards of civility, once thought essential to public
deliberation, are clearly under assault. For example, Fox News, which accumulated 47% of all
consistently conservative news consumers (Mitchell, Gottfried, Kiley, & Matsa, 2014), ampli-
fied nationalist uprisings and “politicize[d] the very notion of truth” (Mahler & Rutenberg,
2019, para. 10).Talk radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, reach
tens of millions of listeners weekly (“Top Talk Audiences,” n.d.), exert a powerful influence on
conservatism’s ideological development (Rosenwald, 2019), and routinely argue in an uncivil
manner that rejects standards of pragmatic argument (Dagnes, 2010).This pattern indicates that
deliberative principles governing civil participation have been rejected by many conservatives,a
conclusion that reinforces the importance of Bush’s message about McCain. Bush’s jeremiadic
eulogy compelled conservatives to move away from bombast and bravado, which had stoked
white anger and fear at the expense of reasoned debate (Stern, 2016), and return to the values
that McCain symbolized.
This essay also demonstrates the crucial role epideictic rhetoric has in argumentation. If
the main goal of argument is attitude change, as Blair (2003) posited, a speaker’s rhetorical
maneuvers are inextricable from dialectic and logic. In this situation, Bush criticizedTrump for
threatening civic bonds essential to political debate that, in turn, are at the core of liberal dem-
ocracy, through epideictic appeals. Bush’s eulogy revealed the status of local conservative argu-
ment in the Trump era and also indicated where that argument might go in the future.Thus,
he reinforced core values, ideologies, or myths currently under strain by grounding arguments
about the identity of the movement or nation in larger argumentative principles. Since epi-
deictic is inseparable from other components of deliberation, argumentation scholars should
continue scrutinizing the jeremiadic eulogy and other epideictic forms to define core principles
related to public deliberation.
Note
1 My thanks to Professor Robert Rowland for his guidance on earlier drafts of this manuscript.My thanks
also go to Professor Dale Hample, the anonymous reviewers, and the conference planners.
References
Berkovitch, S. (1978). The American jeremiad. Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Blair,J.A.(2003).A time for argument theory integration.In C.A.Willard (Ed.),Critical problems in argumen-
tation (pp. 337–344).Washington, D.C.: National Communication Association.
Bush,G.W.(2018,September 1).READ: Former President GeorgeW. Bush’s eulogy for Sen.John McCain.
CNN. Retrieved from www.cnn.com/2018/09/01/politics/bush-mccain-eulogy/index.html
Campbell, K.K., & Jamieson, K.H. (2008). Presidents creating the presidency: Deeds done in words. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Dagnes, A. (2010). Politics on demand: The effects of 24-hour news on American politics. Santa Barbara,
CA: Praeger.
Frank,D.A.(2014).Facing Moloch: Barack Obama’s national eulogies and gun violence.Rhetoric and Public
Affairs, 17, 653–678.
Goodnight, G.T. (1987). Public discourse. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 4, 428–431.
Goodnight,G.T.,Majdik,Z.P.,& Kephart,J.M.(2007).Presidential debates as public argument.In S.Jacobs
(ed.), Concerning argument (pp. 267–279).Washington, D.C.: National Communication Association.
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 134
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 134 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27

6. 135
A Jeremiadic Eulogy
1
3
5
Jamieson, K.H., & Campbell, K.K. (1982). Rhetorical hybrids: Fusions of generic elements. Quarterly
Journal of Speech, 68, 146–157.
Jones, J.M., & Rowland, R.C. (2005). A covenant-affirming jeremiad: The post-presidential ideological
appeals of Ronald Wilson Reagan. Communication Studies, 56, 157–174.
King, L., & Calmes, J. (2018, September 1). Pomp, grandeur and bipartisan tributes at farewell for McCain,
as an uninvited president looms. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-
pol-mccain-washington-funeral-20180901-story.html
Landau, J., & Keeley-Jonker, B. (2018). Conductor of public feelings: An affective emotional rhetorical
analysis of Obama’s national eulogy in Tuscon. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 104, 166–188.
Mahler,J.,& Rutenberg,J.(2019,April 3).How Rupert Murdoch’s empire of influence remade the world.
New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/03/magazine/
rupert-murdoch-fox-news-trump.html
Mitchell,A.,Gottfried,J.,Kiley,J.,& Matsa,K.E.(2014,October 21).Political polarization & media habits.Pew
ResearchCenter.Retrievedfromwww.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/
Ritter,K.(1980).American political rhetoric and the jeremiad tradition: Presidential nomination addresses,
1960–1976. Central States Speech Journal, 31, 153–171.
Rosenwald, B. (2019, August 21). They just wanted to entertain. The Atlantic. Retrieved from www.
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/talk-radio-made-todays-republican-party/596380/
Rowland, R.C. (2018). Implicit standards of public argument in presidential debates: What the 2016
debates reveal about public deliberation. Argumentation & Advocacy, 54, 76–94.
Stern, K. (2016, November 23). My descent into the right-wing media vortex. Vanity Fair. Retrieved from
www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/my-descent-into-the-right-wing-media-vortex
“Top talk audiences.” (n.d.). Talkers.com. Retrieved from www.talkers.com/top-talk-audiences/
Zelizer, J. (2018, September 2). George W. Bush and Barack Obama: Consolers in chief. CNN. Retrieved
from www.cnn.com/2018/09/01/opinions/bush-obama-consolers-in-chief-zelizer/index.html
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 135
9780367710354_pi-488.indd 135 13-Nov-20 22:34:27
13-Nov-20 22:34:27