DOMINANT IDEOLOGY DOMINANT IDEOLOGY IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS.

DOMINANT IDEOLOGY

IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES:

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

RESEARCH PAPER Submitted as a Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for Getting Bachelor Degree

of Education in English Department

by:

NURSUCI APRILIANTO A 320 070 268

SCHOOL OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA

ii

APPROVAL

DOMINANT IDEOLOGY

IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES:

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

by

NURSUCI APRILIANTO A 320 070 268

Approved to be Examined by the Consultant Team

Consultant I

Drs. M. Thoyibi, M.S. NIK. 410

Consultant II

Anam Sutopo, S.Pd., M.Hum. NIK. 849

iii

ACCEPTANCE

DOMINANT IDEOLOGY IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

Accepted and Approved by the Board of Examiner

School of Teacher Training and Education

Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta

on June 1, 2011

Team of Examiner:

1. Drs. M. Thoyibi, M. S. ( )

(Chair Person)

2. Anam Sutopo, S.Pd, M.Hum. ( )

(Member I)

3. Drs. Abdillah Nugroho, M.Hum ( )

(Member II)

Dean

Drs. Sofyan Anif, M.Si. NIK. 547

iv TESTIMONY

Herewith, I testify that in this research paper, there is no plagiarism of the previous literary work which has been conducted in obtaining bachelor degree of university, and also there are no masterpieces which have been written or published by others, except those in writing are referred in the manuscript and mentioned in the literature review and bibliography.

Hence, later, if it is proven that there are some untrue statements in this testimony, I will be fully responsible.

Surakarta, June 1, 2011

Nursuci Aprilianto A 320 070 268

v MOTTO

Verily! Allah will not change the good condition of a people as long as they do not change their state of goodness themselves (by committing sins and by being ungrateful and disobedient to Allah). but when Allah wills a people's Punishment, there can be no turning back of it, and they

will find besides Him no protector.

(QS Ar Ra’d: 11)

Then which of the Blessings of Your Lord will You both (jinn and men) deny?

(QS Ar Rahmaan : 13)

When you change your journey because you love Allâh you will get Allâh and His

creatures will approach to you.

(Taufiq Arif Prabowo)

Successes are planned, and do it vigorously. When you plan your success but you do

it lazily, it means you were planning your own failure.

(Hari Bowo)

(The Writer)

vi

DEDICATION

This research paper is whole – heartly dedicated to:

his mother

Wahyuningsih

his father

Casdi

vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Assalamu’alaikum Wr. Wb.

First of all, the writer would like to express his gratitude to Allah SWT, the merciful and compassionate for all blessing and divine guidance during the preparation until the accomplishment of this paper. The writer realizes that in arranging this research paper, the writer got help, support and encouragement from others. He would like to convey his deepest thanks to all persons who have helped him totally both direct and indirect in accomplishing this research paper.

Therefore, the writer would like to express his thanks to:

1. Drs. H. Sofyan Anif, M.si, as the Dean of School of Teacher Training and Education,

2. Titis Setyabudi. S.S, as Head of English Department,

3. Drs. M. Thoyibi, M.S, as the first consultant who has ready guided and adviced patiently during the arrangement this research paper,

4. Anam Sutopo, S.Pd, M.Hum, as the Academic Advisor and as the second consultant, who has guided him in correcting the research writing,

5. Drs. Abdillah Nugroho, M.Hum, as the third examiner,

6. all Lecturers in English Department, for the knowledge and the guidance, 7. his beloved mother (Wahyuningsih), who give him her love, care, prayer,

viii

8. his father (Casdi), who treat him to be a good man and to do something with full responsibility,

9. his dearest brother (N.W. Risqy Asdianto) for smiling which had been always given to him,

10. his lovely cousin (Ida Fitriyani) who always accompanies him anytime, 11. his beloved aunt and uncle (Mbak E’es and Om Gi), for their guidance to

be plain people,

12. his great family (Ma’e, Wawan, Simbah, Budhe Krin, Mas Joen, Mbak Nanik, Aji, Lian, Rahma, Mas Najib (Mb Ied husband will be)) for supporting the writer trough the hard way,

13. Taufiq A Prabowo, his “great teacher”, for the inspiration, guidance, advice, supports, and patients to make his life more meaningful than before, 14. Nanang Khafizhuddin, his roommate, for the supports to be better people

every day,

15. Devy Novita Andriyani, Hari Bowo, and their son “Salman Hakim Andebo”, for the inspiration and their advice in his life,

16. Afifah Nurul Hidayah & Arumi Martyastuti, for the place to share all problems in his life,

17. English ‟07 Friends (Adjick_Potter, Lila_Abay, Dedy, Nai_Benjo,

Pakdhe, Maul, Ham_ham, Nyak-Avit, Mpok_Riena, Irma, Etha_Pesek, Fitri_Nying-nying, Anggiet-toon, Yoga, Amir, Yulia Arie, Shasa and Mini) for the lovely friendship.,

ix

18. EDSO „09 (Pa’e Teguh, Bunda Aniez, Bu’e Isna, Rani, Rhenie, Anto, ’

Sandow, Mas Fu) for the greatest experiences in that “home”,

19. Team 9 (Setyo*Hulug, Arumi, Rietha@djoe, Adhe WangWung, Dwi Ha, Arwan®MatSoLar, GenDug^Saty, SimBah~Nova) for the patient to give their experience and knowledge of organization,

20. BEM “TeLo” FKIP 2010 (Anton, Srikitiew, Monchew, Epin, Mukhlis,

Lutfy, Agus Sutelo, Ephonk, Fitri, Hamtaro, Supri, Aish, Jay, Sugeng, Riena), for giving the new experiences, lovely friendship, smile, and togetherness, 21. His dearest friends (Anggi P Kusumadani & Elinda Novitasari) for the

support,

22. Wisma At Tanwir 3 (Indri, Broery, NurHadi, Aden, A’ Farid, Yoga, Jati, Chasa, Gito, Wiria, Yusuf, Wisnu and Hamdan) for the kindness and the supports,

23. LPMS Crew (Akh Ahid, A’ Rifqy, Akh Supri, Akh Fadly, Akh Rojie, A’

Budi, A’ Roni, A’ Zaenal, A’ Thohir, Bagus, Yoni, Yunus, Sofyan, Nasheer, and

Ustadz Tamim) for the lesson, that to be different is the best choice,

For all that the writer cannot mention, but the deepest thank, he hopes Allah SWT will bless them all. The writer is entirely aware that his paper is far from being perfect. Therefore, he hopes it can evoke some criticisms for progress.

Wassalamu’alaikum Wr.Wb

Surakarta, June 1, 2011

Nursuci Aprilianto A 320 070 268

x SUMMARY

NURSUCI APRILIANTO, A 320 070 268, DOMINANT IDEOLOGY IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS, RESEARCH PAPER, MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA, 2011

This study is about the dominant ideology in the 2008 presidential debates, especially in the Barack Hussein Obama arguments. This objective of the study is to analyze the structural elements of the 2008 U.S. presidential debates and identify the dominant ideology, which is reflected in the 2008 U.S. presidential debate especially in the Barack Hussein Obama’s arguments based on critical discourse analysis theory.

Teun A van Dijk Theory was used to answer the problem of the study. The study is descriptive qualitative research whose the data are taken from the transcripts of 2008 U.S. presidential debates which was issued by Commission on Presidential Debates. The data collecting technique is library research, while the data analyzing technique is descriptive.

The result of the study shows the following conclusion. First, based on structural analysis the writer delivered the reflection of ideology in the debates. Second based on the critical discourse analysis theory, the dominant ideology of Barack Hussein Obama is democracy. Third, the social condition of American society in 2008 and the background of Democratic Party influence the dominant ideology of Barack Hussein Obama.

Keywords: dominant ideology, democracy, U.S. presidential debate, Barack Obama, critical discourse analysis

Consultant I

Drs. M. Thoyibi, M.S. NIK. 410

Consultant II

Anam Sutopo, S.Pd., M.Hum. NIK. 849

Dean,

Drs. H. Sofyan Anif, M. Si. NIK. 547

xi

LIST OF TABLE

page

Table 4.1. McCain and Obama Economic Programs ... 79

Table 4.2. McCain-Obama Health Care Policy ... 87

Table 4.3. McCain-Obama Iraq and Afghanistan Policy ... 90

Table 4.4. McCain-Obama Abortion Programs ... 96

Table 4.5. Educational Programs ... 100

Table 4.7. Obama and McCain Ideology Based on Their Keywords ... 104

LIST OF SCHEMA page Schema 4.1. McCain’s Ideology ... 110

xii

TABLE OF CONTENT

page

TITTLE ... i

APPROVAL ... ii

ACCEPTANCE ... iii

TESTIMONY ... iv

MOTTO ... v

DEDICATION ... vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... vii

SUMMARY ... x

LIST OF TABLE ... xi

LIST OF SCHEMA ... xi

TABLE OF CONTENT ... xii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Previous Study ... 7

C. Problem Statement ... 8

D. Objective of the Study ... 8

E. Limitation of the Study ... 9

F. Benefit of the Study ... 9

G. Research Method ... 10

H. Research Paper Organization ... 12

CHAPTER II: UNDERLYING THEORY A. Notion of Critical Discourse Analysis ... 13

xiii

B. Structural Elements of CDA ... 15

1. Macrostructure ... 16

2. Superstructure ... 16

3. Microstructure ... 17

C. Social Cognition of CDA ... 18

D. Historical Context of CDA ... 19

E. Notion of Debates ... 19

F. Notion of Ideology ... 22

1. Nationalism ... 23

2. Democracy ... 24

3. Capitalism ... 25

4. Socialism... 25

5. Conservatism ... 26

6. Liberalism ... 26

7. Communism ... 27

8. Anarchism ... 27

9. Fascism ... 28

10. Globalism ... 28

G. Theoretical Application ... 29

CHAPTER III: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS A. Macrostructure ... 30

1. The First McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 31

xiv

3. The Third McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 37

B. Superstructure ... 42

1. The First McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 43

2. The Second McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 47

3. The Third McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 51

C. Microstructure ... 56

1. Semantic Element ... 56

2. Stylistic Element ... 64

3. Syntactic Element ... 65

4. Rhetoric Element ... 71

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH ANALYSIS A. Social Cognition and Historical Context ... 78

1. Economy ... 79

2. Health Care System ... 86

3. Iraq and Afghanistan Policy ... 90

4. Abortion ... 96

5. Education ... 99

B. Dominant Ideology ... 102

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ... 111

B. Suggestion ... 102 BIBLIOGRAPHY

ix

18. EDSO „09 (Pa’e Teguh, Bunda Aniez, Bu’e Isna, Rani, Rhenie, Anto, ’ Sandow, Mas Fu) for the greatest experiences in that “home”,

19. Team 9 (Setyo*Hulug, Arumi, Rietha@djoe, Adhe WangWung, Dwi Ha,

Arwan®MatSoLar, GenDug^Saty, SimBah~Nova) for the patient to give their experience and knowledge of organization,

20. BEM “TeLo” FKIP 2010 (Anton, Srikitiew, Monchew, Epin, Mukhlis, Lutfy, Agus Sutelo, Ephonk, Fitri, Hamtaro, Supri, Aish, Jay, Sugeng, Riena), for giving the new experiences, lovely friendship, smile, and togetherness,

21. His dearest friends (Anggi P Kusumadani & Elinda Novitasari) for the

support,

22. Wisma At Tanwir 3 (Indri, Broery, NurHadi, Aden, A’ Farid, Yoga, Jati,

Chasa, Gito, Wiria, Yusuf, Wisnu and Hamdan) for the kindness and the supports,

23. LPMS Crew (Akh Ahid, A’ Rifqy, Akh Supri, Akh Fadly, Akh Rojie, A’

Budi, A’ Roni, A’ Zaenal, A’ Thohir, Bagus, Yoni, Yunus, Sofyan, Nasheer, and Ustadz Tamim) for the lesson, that to be different is the best choice,

For all that the writer cannot mention, but the deepest thank, he hopes Allah SWT will bless them all. The writer is entirely aware that his paper is far from being perfect. Therefore, he hopes it can evoke some criticisms for progress.

Wassalamu’alaikum Wr.Wb

Surakarta, June 1, 2011

Nursuci Aprilianto A 320 070 268

x SUMMARY

NURSUCI APRILIANTO, A 320 070 268, DOMINANT IDEOLOGY IN THE 2008 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS, RESEARCH PAPER, MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA, 2011

This study is about the dominant ideology in the 2008 presidential debates, especially in the Barack Hussein Obama arguments. This objective of the study is to analyze the structural elements of the 2008 U.S. presidential debates and identify the dominant ideology, which is reflected in the 2008 U.S. presidential debate especially in the Barack Hussein Obama’s arguments based on critical discourse analysis theory.

Teun A van Dijk Theory was used to answer the problem of the study. The study is descriptive qualitative research whose the data are taken from the transcripts of 2008 U.S. presidential debates which was issued by Commission on Presidential Debates. The data collecting technique is library research, while the data analyzing technique is descriptive.

The result of the study shows the following conclusion. First, based on structural analysis the writer delivered the reflection of ideology in the debates. Second based on the critical discourse analysis theory, the dominant ideology of Barack Hussein Obama is democracy. Third, the social condition of American society in 2008 and the background of Democratic Party influence the dominant ideology of Barack Hussein Obama.

Keywords: dominant ideology, democracy, U.S. presidential debate, Barack Obama, critical discourse analysis

Consultant I

Drs. M. Thoyibi, M.S. NIK. 410

Consultant II

Anam Sutopo, S.Pd., M.Hum. NIK. 849

Dean,

Drs. H. Sofyan Anif, M. Si. NIK. 547

xi

LIST OF TABLE

page

Table 4.1. McCain and Obama Economic Programs ... 79

Table 4.2. McCain-Obama Health Care Policy ... 87

Table 4.3. McCain-Obama Iraq and Afghanistan Policy ... 90

Table 4.4. McCain-Obama Abortion Programs ... 96

Table 4.5. Educational Programs ... 100

Table 4.7. Obama and McCain Ideology Based on Their Keywords ... 104

LIST OF SCHEMA page Schema 4.1. McCain’s Ideology ... 110

xii

TABLE OF CONTENT

page

TITTLE ... i

APPROVAL ... ii

ACCEPTANCE ... iii

TESTIMONY ... iv

MOTTO ... v

DEDICATION ... vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ... vii

SUMMARY ... x

LIST OF TABLE ... xi

LIST OF SCHEMA ... xi

TABLE OF CONTENT ... xii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Previous Study ... 7

C. Problem Statement ... 8

D. Objective of the Study ... 8

E. Limitation of the Study ... 9

F. Benefit of the Study ... 9

G. Research Method ... 10

H. Research Paper Organization ... 12

CHAPTER II: UNDERLYING THEORY A. Notion of Critical Discourse Analysis ... 13

xiii

B. Structural Elements of CDA ... 15

1. Macrostructure ... 16

2. Superstructure ... 16

3. Microstructure ... 17

C. Social Cognition of CDA ... 18

D. Historical Context of CDA ... 19

E. Notion of Debates ... 19

F. Notion of Ideology ... 22

1. Nationalism ... 23

2. Democracy ... 24

3. Capitalism ... 25

4. Socialism... 25

5. Conservatism ... 26

6. Liberalism ... 26

7. Communism ... 27

8. Anarchism ... 27

9. Fascism ... 28

10. Globalism ... 28

G. Theoretical Application ... 29

CHAPTER III: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS A. Macrostructure ... 30

1. The First McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 31

xiv

3. The Third McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 37

B. Superstructure ... 42

1. The First McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 43

2. The Second McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 47

3. The Third McCain-Obama Presidential Debate ... 51

C. Microstructure ... 56

1. Semantic Element ... 56

2. Stylistic Element ... 64

3. Syntactic Element ... 65

4. Rhetoric Element ... 71

CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH ANALYSIS A. Social Cognition and Historical Context ... 78

1. Economy ... 79

2. Health Care System ... 86

3. Iraq and Afghanistan Policy ... 90

4. Abortion ... 96

5. Education ... 99

B. Dominant Ideology ... 102

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ... 111

B. Suggestion ... 102 BIBLIOGRAPHY