Richard Nixon Checkers Essay

Prior to the 1952 presidential election, vice-presidential candidate Richard Nixon confronted a selective political persecution. He was targeted, possibly by those within his own party, by the drudging up and the exposing of a slush fund, in which Nixon used to pay for extra governmental expenses. Instead by heeding to the political pressure and removing himself from the ticket, like those who created the scandal would have wanted, Richard Nixon delivered an impeccable thirty-minute speech, in which he not only defended and cleared himself, but he also turned the tables on his democratic opponents and even indirectly threatened General Eisenhower himself. Nixon’s “Checkers,” named after the Nixon family dog, speech is widely regarded as

In other words, Nixon was able to denounce someone or their actions without coming across as accusatory. During most of the “Checkers” speech, Nixon is not only defending himself but also indirectly calling out others for either doing the same things, such as having a slush fund, or having other questionable political expenses. For example Nixon prides himself on not having his wife, Pat Nixon, on the government payroll. His opponent for the vice presidency in 1952, Senator John Sparkman, does. As a result, Nixon says, “Another way that is used [to pay for political expenses] is to put your wife on the pay roll. Let me say, incidentally, that my opponent, my opposite number for the vice presidency on the Democratic ticket, does have his wife on the pay roll and has had her on his pay roll for the past ten years. Now just let me say this: That’s his business, and I’m not critical of him for doing that. You will have to pass judgement on that particular point” (Nixon). Upon hearing Nixon say this, the American listener is focused on their judgment of whether Senator Sparkman should have his wife on the payroll, not that Nixon took a low political shot at his opponent to defend himself. By stating that he is “not critical” of the senator and by telling the American people the judgement is theirs, Nixon

Nixon declares, “I would suggest that under the circumstances both Mr. Sparkman and Mr. Stevenson should come before the American people, as I have, and make a full financial statement as to their financial history, and if they don’t it will be an admission that they have something to hide” (Nixon). Again, Nixon is “suggesting” by demanding that his opponents provide the same financial information that he did. Without demanding, Nixon can get the American public to that is was partly their own idea in order to demand for Adlai Stevenson provide that history, not Nixon defending himself by playing the “he did it too”