The Art of NOT Speaking Rhetorically

After the presentations given this week, I began to think how heavily humanity relies on rhetoric. I then began to wonder if we ever do not speak rhetorically. Even if we are telling someone something, such as "I love you" or "That was disgusting," you are trying to convince them of the way you feel about something, and that your feelings are legitimate. We have read in our texts about the near deaths of rhetoric and the work of various people to revive the discipline. But could rhetoric ever really disappear? I think not. Perhaps the study of it, the classification and conventions of different time periods, but not rhetoric itself. Rhetorical speaking is innate to human nature. We have named what we do, but it would exist and be practiced even if it remained unnamed.
The rhetoric in the programs hosted on television is easily identifiable; it was clearly shown that even when the claim to be unbiased and unbiasing was made, we were shown that bias existed. To communicate is to present information in some light, and it will always be presented in agreement with opinions and ideologies. And it will always be interpreted even more critically, in agreement or opposition to the recievers philosophy.
Wiesel's speech had obvious rhetorical content as well. He was defining and illustrating indifference while explaining how those in his examples manifested a praiseworthy lack of the attitude or a blameworthy possession of it. He spoke is such a way as to persuade his audience that his judgements were correct.
Even the reality shows themselves, aside from the intentional rhetoric employed by writers of commentaries, purport values, judgements, and standards on their audiences. They don't have to say anything explicitly to make the point that image instead of personality should be pruned until it meets the current societal ideal.
So, is it possible to speak without using rhetoric? That, I believe, would truly be an art.