Posted by
conservativedude on Thursday, October 23, 2008 3:58:12 AM
Words are essential. We use them to get our points across and convince others that we are right, while also discrediting any opposition that comes our way. The 2008 election is proof enough that ad campaigns, debate language, perceptions and tones in the media, as well as pundit and surrogate commentaries provide all the linguistic fodder that can make or break a campaign.
I'm going to cover some examples of how words and language have been used in recent months to wage a political war. In 'Part 1', I'm focusing on labels and how playing on people's sympathy for the "suffering/oppressed" or fear of being called a racist has been a vital tactic employed by the left.
1. Guilt & Fear Mongering
During all campaigns, democratic politicians try and make us feel bad for those who are less fortunate. The problem is, they target groups who don't want jobs or drug addicts who would rather get high than be an upstanding citizen. No one questions that we should help people in need, but they want to take our money to fund government entitlement programs and that's a problem.
I mean, Robin Hood did it, so why can't we?
Hood took from the oppressive (who were rich) and gave to the oppressed. What Obama and Biden represent is class warfare and indeed socialism. This comes down to their own words. By now we are all familiar with
Joe the plumber, an everday American with a dream of owning his own business, whose neighborhood was visited by Obama. Joe had the
audacity to ask a man running for president this question:
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"
His response might just be the straw that finally breaks this (donkey's) back:
"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
It seems
Senator Government thinks other people are entitled to your money!! No matter how you try to spin it, "spreading the wealth around" for the good of "everyone" is clearly
socialism. Mike Huckabee, on his program, correctly stated that Obama saying those four little words changes everything.
This gem comes on the heels of
Biden's Good Morning America interview where he said,
"We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people." He wants to
take your money. He continued by saying (abut the wealthy who will pay more under an Obama administration),
"It's time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut."
I thought being patriotic meant wearing a flag pin, being proud of your military (and wanting them to succeed), putting your hand over your heart for the anthem and defending the unborn or "born alive" American citizens, but I guess Barack and Michelle Obama missed that memo.
* * *
Another issue which may succeed or fail based on the words used to present it is gay marriage in California, and
you betcha they assert that opponents are homophobic. It's no longer an issue that we can discuss, because if you are critical of opening the flood gate and diminishing the traditional definition of marriage (instead of
a parallel form of marriage for gay couples which I have called for), they say you are not tolerant. What about the opponents of Prop. 8 not being tolerant toward people who support marriage as it has always been--between one man and one woman?
Woman 1: Honestly, I just don't know how I feel about this same-sex marriage thing.
Woman 2: It's okay...and I really think it's fine if you don't know how you feel, but are you willing to eliminate rights and have our laws treat people differently.
Woman 1 (overacted): No!
The ad takes advantage of the fact that gay marriage is currently on the books in California, even though it was wrongfully won by several activist judges a few months ago. Woman 2 says, "are you willing to eliminate rights", despite the fact that according to the will of the people, and the last state-wide vote, it is not a right. And the, "do you want our laws to treat people differently" argument is specious at best because every law on the books has clauses and loopholes, requirements and stipulations, designed to maintain order in a chaotic world. Her argument asserts that we should not acknowledge our differences, and comes with a level of tolerance I'm familiar with. She says she's "fine" with her friend having a different opinion, but goes on to trap her in a corner. This just proves it's hard to fight liberal perspectives when they play any sort of 'tolerance card'.
Speaking of cards, the most talked about card this season has been of course the race card. Interestingly, no one has criticized Obama for his race. Those assertions have pre-emptively come from Obama himself, and his hordes of far-left surrogates. On The O'Reilly Factor, Dennis Miller aptly described this trend as playing the 'race card' card. Here's
the one to top:
"It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy. We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced, and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’ ” -Obama
He also said (Republicans would say), "he's got a feisty wife", and was quoted as
saying, "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."
Obama is a brilliant campaigner. He effectively brought up the topic conservatives never would---the issue of race. He tried to scare his followers into buying that an imaginary hate-machine from the right wants to tear him down because he's black. He also expertly linked his clear inexperience to his race, quite effectively limiting the attacks in that vein. The "funny name" part echoes his "clinging to religion and guns" comment in Pennsylvania and illustrates his elitism---how he separates himself from the rest of us because we are too tolerant and won't do it for him! He also effectively explained away Michelle's "first time proud of her country" remarks by calling her "fiesty"---so now any critique of her will be perceived as a racial attack trying to portray her as a crazy black woman.
Along with this racism fear tactic comes the agenda of stealing the term "change" as if Obama is the first politician in history to challenge the status quo to get elected, and that McCain and every other politician running for office this year isn't doing the same.
Change is not a brainchild of this election cycle. Every politician ever running for office has run on the mantra of change, but the lemmings have spoken and apparently The One is actually the first to ever call for change. If you believe that, I recommend checking out this clip from Andy Griffith's
A Face in the Crowd from 51 years ago.
I especially like the quotes, "...Instead of long-winded public debates, people want slogans...'Time for a change'...punchlines and drama." And no doubt faux Greek columns. Maybe Obama never saw it, since he hadn't yet been born, or else he's hoping his young, hip target audience--sorry, I mean demographics---haven't seen it either since this title is not available on iTunes.
According to the liberals, if you want change this election season, "change" does not mean new and innovative ideas (of either candidate), rather: "Obama is African-American and he represents the change America needs." Thanks for that reminder that his father was African, but that racial qualifier is used so often to lead the electorate to the decision that "change" should be based on the fact he doesn't look like any of the other presidents, instead of his platform. After all those years in public schools, I'm tired of liberals trying to make me feel bad for today's black people---and the need to overcompensate now---because of prejudice from a time before I was born.
If he does not win, they will blame it on racism, just as they did with Tom Bradley,
a black candidate for California Governor in 1982 who lost after leading in polls. Tell ya what, I think I can live with that. The fact is, I've been called much worse for far less a
transgression than supporting a different candidate in a democratic election.
You can't even criticize community organizing, despite all the
illegal activities of ACORN involving voter registration fraud in a dozen states and their ground-floor involvement in the current financial crisis, because "community organizing" is a
codeword for "black" and therefore untouchable.
Keep your eyes peeled for Part II, which will explore the so-called "codewords" that the left accuse conservatives of saying.