Matt Robida's E-Portfolio

I’m currently an undergraduate student majoring in Crime, Law, and Justice (BA) at Penn State University. As an aspiring Paterno Fellow I often find myself in the library for long enough periods of time to be able to call it my home away from home. As I progress through my education, I hope to attend law school and earn a JD, focusing on either criminal law or constitutional law.

In my desired profession, rhetoric is very prevalent, and it is extremely important to understand what rhetoric is and how to use it. Through the education I have received so far, I have discovered that rhetoric is used for much more than the stereotypical explanations of it. Normally, people think of rhetoric as an underhanded technique used in politics to gain the upper hand. However, through my education, I have come to understand that rhetoric is constantly being used, whether we realize it or not.

Every action a person makes has rhetorical aspects to it, whether it be the timing of the action, known as kairos, or someone listening to a respected person, known as ethos.  While we all are using rhetoric, it is important to utilize it, as utilization can result in a greater ethos, which in turn, can help influence others, which is the basis of rhetorical choices.

Once one gains the ability to understand rhetoric will allow that person to understand why others use rhetorical choices. Being able to file through all the rhetoric in the world and discover what is beneficial is extremely important, and can help a person progress in their endeavors.

As a law student, learning the effective use of rhetoric has been one of the most important lessons from my education thus far. Having the ability to utilize such a powerful tool will be extremely beneficial, and eventually, I believe it will make me a better lawyer.

On this site, you will find several of my own essays, which examine the use of rhetoric in different mediums throughout society. In each case, numerous rhetorical choices were used, both by the subjects of the work, as well as by me, the author. Through these, I hope to both demonstrate my own understanding of rhetoric, as well as provide examples for those wishing to gain a better understanding.

Matt Robida's E- Portfolio

It's Halftime, America

On Tuesday, GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney dominated the Republican primaries, sweeping the primaries in Wisconsin, Maryland, and Washington DC. This is practically a death blow to the Santorum campaign, and pretty much everybody is aware.

Everyone, that is, except Rick Santorum.

In a speech after the primaries, Santorum stated, "It's halftime" and that he was ready to "storm out of the locker room" for the second half. To further accentuate his claims, Santorum appealed to the Ethos of the Republican god, Ronald Reagan.

Santorum recalled the fact that in 1976, Reagan hadn't won a single primary until May, and was able to take the race all the way to the GOP national convention, where he eventually lost. This, he claims, resulted in a loss in the general election.

Of course, the logos Santorum's argument is inherently flawed, as comparing himself to Reagan in '76 is basically saying he is going to divide the party and help Obama win the general election.

Though, Santorum did go on to say that in 1980, the GOP finally nominated Reagan, and he eventually won the general election. He continued, saying it was a mistake in 1976 to not elect Reagan, and it would be a mistake to wait until 2016 to elect Santorum.

Santorum actually believes that he is going to win the nomination, and will continue fighting until the end. This will likely create further parity inside the GOP, and could hurt Romney's chances at election. This reveals that Santorum's logos in regards to the whole election process is completely flawed, and by doing this, he is actually helping President Obama closer to victory.

Mitt Romney screws up again... sigh...

Ok, now it's starting to get old. At first, I liked watching the Republican candidates say a bunch of completely nonsensical things as much as the next guy. It seriously was some of the most entertaining television for several months. Unfortunately, it's starting to get old.

This past week alone, Rick Santorum lost his cool when he was asked whether he said Mitt Romney was the worst republican in the country (he kinda did),  and both Santorum and Gingrich (once again) completely misinterpreted President Obama's words calling for solidarity in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting.

http://live.drjays.com/index.php/2012/03/27/rick-santorum-loses-temper-calls-nyt-reporters-question-bullshit/

However, the most publicized gaffe came when, during a national interview, Romney's adviser Eric Ferhnstrom compared the Romney campaign to an etch-a-sketch, in that "you can kinda shake it up and restart all over again."

Opponents of Romney quickly took to the offensive, claiming that this proved that Romney didn't really care about the issues, and would say anything to win. Quite frankly, given Romney's past statements, his opponents are correct.

The reveal of these details severely hurts Romney's ethos, as he will not portray the idea of an ethical, moral president, but rather a person who will stop at nothing to gain power, even if it means lying to the people.

At this point in time though, it appears that these comments will not affect the outcome of the republican primary, as Rick Santorum must win 70% of the remaining primaries to win the nomination. Astonishingly, this could even be considered good kairos. While the statement was ill-advised, it could have come earlier in the race, and destroyed Romney's campaign. However, since the comment was made so late in the process, it doesn't look like Romeny will be affected.

But this whole etch-a-sketch thing isn't all bad. In fact, there is now a fun new website, etchasketchmittromney.com, in which one can see numerous Romney flip-flops on an etch-a-sketch.

And, etch-a-sketch sales have risen 3000% since the comment was made. Romney inadvertently helped out the economy!

Seriously though, it's getting frustrating listening to these guys. Of course, funny Rick Santorum photos never get old.

Fighting Rick Santorum

Today, I'm going to continue riding on the Rick Santorum bandwagon. No, I'm not talking about being a Rick Santorum supporter, I'm talking about blogging about him at his expense. And today, I'm gonna push the boundaries about as far as they can go, and it is all completely justifiable!

Recently, as many of you know, Rick Santorum has taken some very conservative stances on the issues... Especially those issues involving gay marriage and pornography. In fact, before Santorum's run for president even began, he was already making stupid comments that caused major controversy.

Back in 2003, Santorum stated in an AP interview that "In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing."

Now, Santorum claims that he was saying that homosexual sex was not beastiality, but others are skeptical, arguing that if that were true, he'd never had brought up "man on dog" in the first place. After Santorum defended himself, the tension boiled over, and journalist Dan Savage decided it was time to act.

By acting, I mean Savage created a new definition of the word Santorum on the website spreadingsantorum.com, and began an internet campaign to make it the first thing that comes up on a google search of the word. His plan was successful, and now the name Santorum will forever be associated with-- No, I'm not going to post the definition on here. If you don't already know what santorum now means, and you really want to know, just look it up on Google. Just be prepared to be thoroughly disgusted.

More recently, Santorum has attacked the pornography industry, claiming that it is dangerous to American morals, and is causing violence to spread. Beside the fact that he is wrong, Santorum has kinda annoyed the male community (I'm sure other groups are annoyed too, but men were the first people to come to mind). Of course, these comments once again made Santorum look dumber and dumber. Seriously, why would someone ever put eliminating pornography as a major concern, while there is so much wrong with our country?

In response to this, internet users decided to make some rather clever images. The first, as seen above, is a portrait of Rick Santorum made completely out of gay pornography (it becomes borderline NSFW if you enlarge it). The second, seen below, is a bunch of small images of Rick Santorum, forming the image of gay pornography.

Rick Santorum

Not only is this trend of utilizing Rick Santorum's hatred for/obsession with homosexuality and pornography to create jokes hilarious, but it also has utilized kairos and ehtos in attempts to derail his campaign.

The timing of these attacks on Santorum have come at the perfect time, right during presidential election season, when the eyes of America are locked upon Santorum. Now, if a potential voter who knows nothing about Santorum looks him up online, they will be shocked, and the word Santorum will evoke images they'd rather not think about, and could even decide to not vote for him (which is the goal). And the pictures do the same thing, as Rick Santorum and gay porn are forever linked.

The plan is that by linking the two, opposition of Santorum hopes that Santorum's ethos will drop due to a lack of credibility. Obviously, they hope that internet users won't pay enough attention to notice that these definitions and images are meant to make him look bad. In fact, this is just normal political mudslinging that voters see every single election season. Campaign ads do exactly the same thing, by questioning superficial characteristics of opposing candidates in order to lower their ethos.

I personally hope Santorum stays in this race all the way until the Republican National Convention, where  he will inevitably lose to Mitt Romney. My reasoning isn't that Santorum is a good candidate, in fact he is very far from being a god candidate. My reasoning is that Rick Santorum has been extremely entertaining, and the comedy world will never be quite the same once he is out of the picture... Well, that is until 2016 when he will likely run for office again. It's just like the Olympics, except way funnier.

Oh well, for now I will just have to cherish these last few months of hilarious Santorum-related comedy bits while they last.

The "Logic" of Grover Norquist

On Monday, Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, appeared on the Daily Show to discuss his stance on the issue of Tax Reform.

On the show, Norquist took an absolutist approach to spending, claiming that "taxes should never be raised" and instead should be replaced by lowering spending by Congress. The problem with this is that Norquist refuses to see any other options. This was mostly highlighted when he claimed that the 2010 elections, which he claims were "an election won against spending." This is a major problem with Norquist and many of the anti-tax Republicans; they refuse to look at anything on a wide scope, and demand to get what they want, even if they don't even know the whole picture.

Shortly after Norquist's remark, host Jon Stewart noted that the election was won on "both [spending and taxes] and a few other things." This two second answer completely reveals the problem with politics in general; people are unwilling to to acknowledge a grey area, and have turned politics into a right vs. wrong mentality.

I also found it interesting how Norquist explained the fact that America faced a deficit with the previous three republican presidents, and a surplus under Clinton. To counter this, he claimed that lower taxes actually helped boost America's revenue before Clinton, but it went into effect while he was in office, but his policies caused the economy to once again fall apart when Bush took over.

Now, you could easily say that his opinion matters in the argument, but to me, he's just completely ignorant to how the economy actually works, and refuses to acknowledge the facts. The fact he runs a PAC that has such strong control over the republican party is a major threat to the sanctity of our government as a whole.


To see Norquist on the Daily Show, click here

The "Silence Gun"

Recently, I read an article about a new "gun" that could be used to stop people from being able to talk. The gun uses microphones and speakers to capture and replay a person's voice directly after they speak. When the brain attempts to process the two voices in such close proximity (in time), it becomes confused, making it nearly impossible for a person to speak properly.

Right away, this brought my mind to the dangers of this technology on the rhetorical abilities of Americans. This "weapon" could easily be used to suppress someone's right to free speech. For example, if a person is protesting, how hard would it be for an opponent to aim this "gun" at them and force them to be quiet. Basically, this technology is able to suppress a person's ability to convey their ideas and beliefs.

In doing so, one coud eliminate the original view of debate and rhetoric. Ideas and opinions were exceptionally important to ancient thinkers. However, now, if a person holds a viewpoint against the government, then the government could point the gun at the protester and shut them up (if they have the gun). If someone can do that, then they aren't respecting the opinions of others, and are therefore going against the basic nature of rhetoric and debate.

Rhetoric of art

I enjoy drawing. It's not only an activity that passes the time, it's an activity that allows me to express myself in positive ways. In my dorm room I have a bulletin board covered in drawings I have done in my free time. However, the one thing that annoys me is when people ask me what my work means.

Like music, art isn't supposed to have one set meaning, in fact, I don't always know the intention behind my own drawings. The meaning by art lies in the Pathos created by the experiences of the viewer. It takes their own memories and experiences and instills emotions inside themselves to create meaning. 

For example, here is a drawing I did two weeks ago

The image of a bleeding hand holding a rose obviously will act as a metaphor for some moment in a person's life. It could be a moment in which romance brought them pain, or even just if they pricked their finger on an actual rose. This makes art a pathway to rhetoric.

Art also uses Ehtos as well. Have you ever seen a piece of art that looks simple and unremarkable, but is revered and worth lots of money. Chances are, that piece is by an artist who is famous in the art community. Artists with the respect of their peers can make whatever they wish, and the masses will almost always love their work.

For example, Andy Warhol created a number of pieces of art, such as a drawing of a Campbell's Soup can, and an artistic film about a man receiving a blow job (Literally, the film is called Blow Job, and showcases a man's face as he receives fellatio). These pieces are not in themselves remarkable in any way, but because they are Warhol works, they are regarded as artistic masterpiece.

Warhol Soup Can

Art also facilitates rhetoric through discussion of the art as well. The word choices people use to describe their interpretations of art are all choices of rhetoric that help convey their feelings created by the Pathos enabled by their art. In fact, art is general can be argued to be purely rhetorical in nature.