As I listened to Roosevelt's first fireside chat, I was very intrigued by the intent of his speech. On the surface, the president's first broadcast radio address aimed to educate the public about changes being made within the banking system. In his rhetoric, he made no implications about what people knew and was empathetic to the concerns of others in conveying this understanding. I could say, however, that the real knowledge he wanted to impart was not so much his understanding of the banking industry, but his attunement to the thoughts and emotions of the American people. His repetitive use of intimate phrases such as “my friends” supports the idea that every statement the President made addressed the diverse interests of all citizens. When Roosevelt addressed the nation regarding the bill scheduled for court on March 9, 1937, he took a similar approach in delivery. In reality, spending more time recognizing the complexities of his arguments would have been of little help: FDR was a politician, not a college professor. His decision to speak briefly about such complex issues was obviously deliberate. I was struck by his talent for sticking to general topics, without ever burdening his message with details. To overcome the lack of analysis, Roosevelt used language that expressed the intent of government operations. This can be seen when he compares the US government to a team of “three horses” plowing the people's field. Whenever Roosevelt tried to instill confidence in the American people, he often used very visual and figurative language to ground his message. In the fireside chat on December 9, 1941, Roosevelt's real influence as a politician and orator emerged. In the wake of Pearl Harbor, the President was faced with a tragedy and, ultimately, a big decision. Noticing his repetition of key phrases and an unusually motivating choice of words, I got a sense of how sudden and surprising such an attack was to the public and to Roosevelt. With the country paralyzed by such a crisis, the medium has become the message. No matter what words Roosevelt offered, he spoke with great levity. While his language inspired optimism and strength, the content of the speech paled in comparison to the power of his speech. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Aside from a few references to Christianity, which were used sensibly to further connect listeners on an interpersonal level, the only surprise in listening to Roosevelt's fireside conversations was the difference in form between the speeches of FDR and presidential ones held today. Such a desire to teach Americans on behalf of the president would seem a strange gesture today. In my interpretation, the complexity of politics seems to underlie the content chosen for presidential speeches today. Education by leadership would simply involve assuming the diverse understanding of too many demographics for such an effort to have any measurable impact. Another difference is the way FDR exploits the use of the first person ("I"). It speaks to the way Americans saw the functioning of government as the result of choices made by people, not by mysterious, faceless sectors of control. Even though the point of view presented by Roosevelt was not his own, relating to the points made makes the audience feel like they are gaining insight into FDR as a person. In.