Political editorials are notorious for the use of persuasive techniques. Since magazines, such as The New Republic and The National Review, hold strongly biased opinions on politics in our country, it is important to be able to decipher fact from pure persuasion. I have chosen an article from The American Spectator, an opinion magazine that leans far to the right, called “Welcome to the Bush Boom”, written by Brian S. Wesbury. This article is not a credible piece of information, and it does not make use of actual facts. Rather, the author incorporates an extensive amount of rhetoric to get his opinions across.

The title of the article alone, “Welcome to the Bush Boom”, gives the reader an idea of what is to be examined. Obviously, the article is about Bush. The “Boom”, on the other hand, is referring to the economic rise in this country since the 2001 recession, as well as the rocketing market for high-tech devices. These are the issues that the title suggests, but the article itself is a “hopscotch” of political inquiries. This piece begins with an attack on former president Clinton, specifically about the “mess” he left and scandal he caused. Then, the autho

Given all these points, I find the author’s support of his position to be extremely weak. Most of the article was not even about his intended claim (Bush has saved our economy), he used no factual material for support, and rhetorical devices and ploys were presented throughout the argument. So, over-all, the author should have supported his claim using facts and analysis instead of pseudoreasoning and rhetoric.

Faulty reasoning is yet another rhetorical device that the author has incorporated into his article. He uses peer pressure, appeal to popularity, and bandwagon to objectify his audience: “The benefits are easy to see”, “…that is proof enough..”, and “…don’t fail to see…”. The problem with the use of this sort of reasoning is that it is irrelevant to the claim. It appeals to our desire to be accepted rather than to the merit. Also, as mentioned earlier, the author attacks Clinton and democrats instead of the argument. His use of ad hominem does not actually give us a basis to reject these people and their thoughts. It is just a diversion from explanation. The author ends his article with a clear use of scare tactics/bandwagon: “The Bush Boom has arrived. Ignore it at your own risk”. I believe that he is intending to scare people into accepting his claim as well as exaggerating a bit. By stating that we may be at risk

Some topics in this essay:
Bush Boom”, Global Terror, Bush Undoubtedly, Bush Boom, Jefferson Clinton, Brian Wesbury, National Review, Analysis Political, American Spectator, , bush boom”, factual material support, material support, “welcome bush, economy author, factual material, author article, rhetorical devices, faulty reasoning, credible sources, “welcome bush boom”,