Epideictic and deliberative strategies in opposition to war: The paradox of honor and expediency

Abstract

This essay examines the dissent of two major congressional opponents of war in the modern age: Senators Robert F. Kennedy and Sam Nunn. It advances the argument that, like presidential discourse advocating military action, congressional dissent can be understood in terms of appeals to honor and expediency. Such a framework elucidates the rhetorical dynamics between presidents and Congress and facilitates an understanding of the continuing rhetorical failure of the congressional branch on issues of war and peace.