# Control the language



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

How many of you have read any of Carl Marx strategies. He said that if you control the language you control the people. Democrats have used his technique for years. For example democrats like to call:
Taxes = investments
Tax cuts = income tax credits

Now we see Obama playing the same game. Remember all those tax cuts. Actually there is an increase of billions in welfare, and he considers that tax cuts. There will have to be billions brought in through higher taxes on the wealthy to give these billions to the "poor".

So now tax cuts = redistribution of wealth which equals socialism. Is there anyone who can deny it anymore. Obama = socialist.

Remember Obama saying that one of his most influential authors was Carl Marx? I remember him saying it.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

he promised us change....i think eventually though there will be a backlash from those "footing the bill"....it will eventually end in more independents or republicans being elected to the house and senate..it will take awhile, but it will swing that way.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I agree, but watch their language. The odd thing is that congenital liars will believe themselves if they tell the lie often enough. That's why they can convince so many people. If your aware of it though you stand a chance of seeing through it.

Listen to the words these guys use to replace reality. Listen close. Their language will give away their intent. The first thing you must realize is that when they replace words their first intent is deception.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

deception has always been achieved through clever vernacular...Hitler practiced it as well.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> I agree, but watch their language. The odd thing is that congenital liars will believe themselves if they tell the lie often enough. That's why they can convince so many people. If your aware of it though you stand a chance of seeing through it.
> 
> Listen to the words these guys use to replace reality. Listen close. Their language will give away their intent. The first thing you must realize is that when they replace words their first intent is deception.


Plainsman: You talk as though Republicans are immune from this tactic. That's interesting.

Let's be fair: BOTH sides of the political spectrum use buzz words or buzz terms to control the vernacular. You see it on this board every day. One day, a conservative talking head will drop a term like "drinking the Kool Aid", and the next day folks are using it on this board and everywhere else on the net. The same goes for "flip flopper" in the Kerry/Bush campaign or "No-bama" in this last campaign.

Since these terms move so fast from conservative talk radio to internet message boards or everyday speech, it has to be an organized strategy for language control. The fact that many posters on this board copy and paste emails or news stories is likely due to the fact that the information control is through organized email distribution. How else could it become so widespread so fast?

You talk about repeating lies often enough until people believe it is true. Hmmm... Is that sort of like repeating things like "liberal media", "drive-by media", or "Obama is a Muslim" until people accept it is true. After all, why would so many folks be saying it unless it was true?

Perhaps the conservatives on this board have been manipulated and they haven't even realized it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Plainsman: You talk as though Republicans are immune from this tactic.


Not at all, but they are not the ones in power now. They also don't stick with it like the liberals do. They have called welfare tax cuts for 20 years. They have also called taxes investments for 30 years. I have to hand it to them they are tenacious.



> Let's be fair: BOTH sides of the political spectrum use buzz words or buzz terms to control the vernacular.


 Sure they do.


> One day, a conservative talking head will drop a term like "drinking the Kool Aid",


  Wow are you transparent. Both sides use the term drinking the kool-aid. I think it is used properly most times on here. What I interpret it to mean is that a person is so partisan that they will believe what a republican or a democrat tells them without question. It should be apparent to everyone that doesn't fit Bobm or I. Were ticked at both parties. Unless of course you drink the kool-aid and think Bob or I are partisan.  


> The fact that many posters on this board copy and paste emails or news stories is likely due to the fact that the information control is through organized email distribution.


Actually I think that is wrong. I think those of us who are interested search for it on the internet. We look at many different types of sites, but normally pick from those we trust most. Sometimes we all trust to much and get stung. Both sides. Remember Ryan's Palin information that was such a pile of bs? I have also goofed. I'm not happy with myself when that happens, but I appreciate the correction. I especially appreciate Robert Langagers corrections because he is never a smart ***.



> You talk about repeating lies often enough until people believe it is true. Hmmm... Is that sort of like repeating things like "liberal media", "drive-by media", or "Obama is a Muslim"


First off the media when polled a few years ago by their own admission were 90% liberal. So that's not drinking kool-aid. Drive-bye media is simply a term Rush Limbaugh uses. I think what he means is they take pot shots with no evidence. What was they guys name again who had the informant about Bush being AWOL that turned out totally made up. He lost his job over it. I would call him a drive-bye reporter. It's simply a term to twist the needle a little. Obama is a Muslim. Well, I don't know, but I seriously suspect. You know if you were not honest as I am sure you are and you were in a Muslim country trying to be their leader you might claim to be Muslim too. I'm not a betting man, but if someone put a gun to my head and said I had to bet I would go with he is a closet Muslim. He may belong to a church, but that doesn't mean he isn't Muslim. I think that not because others have said it, but because of his pastor right who is just to friendly with Farrakhan and Kadafi. Then there was that Freudian slip of "my Muslim faith" which he never would have corrected if the interviewer had let it go.



> Perhaps the conservatives on this board have been manipulated and they haven't even realized it.


Who is the they, the poster or the reader?


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> First off the media when polled a few years ago by their own admission were 90% liberal. So that's not drinking kool-aid.


Let's be clear about that poll that conservatives point to time and time again. Ninety percent of the individuals polled were reported to have liberal tendencies. The survey did not say taht 90% of the media sources were liberal. Big difference.

It is a dangerous and incorrect assumption that just because an individual leans to one side of the political spectrum that their professional output will be skewed. The job of a journalist is the report the news, plain and simple, not to offer opinions. Perhaps the "media" that you contend are liberal are not journalists. I would not know since I do not spend my time listening to those people. I have no idea if Tom Brokaw, Charles Gibson, Anderson Cooper, Brian Williams, or Tom King are liberals, conservatives, socialists, or anarchists.

I also contend that most members of the media have access to more information and more diverse opinions than most members of the population. The fact that they individually lean toward the left is telling. You will immediately label this a "liberal arrogance", but I will tell you that my liberal friends read more, listen more, converse more, and frankly think more about the world and the country than my conservative friends do on a daily basis.

In contrast, my conservative friends tend to hang out with other conservatives, and as a result, they spend lots of time bashing liberals, contending that Obama is a Muslim, and talking about conservative things. Again, you will call this arrogance. However, I would bet that more books are checked out from my public library or purchased at Barnes and Noble by folks on the left side of the political dial than on the right.

There is a free seminar this evening in Bismarck on global climate change that will feature Will Steger, a renowed polar explorer. The seminar will focus on real-world accounts and data on climate change. Any bets on whether or not most audience members will be conservatives? I don't think so. The conservative talking heads have already sent out the message that climate change is a myth. In contrast, I know that my liberal friends are going to the seminar to simply hear more information and accounts so that they can make up their own mind.

I also contend that the most editors and producers view their industry as a business, not as a means to push an agenda. If they can sell more papers or advertising by focusing on conservative issues, then they would. However, there must not be adequate demand.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

I would not know since I do not spend my time listening to those people. I have no idea if Tom Brokaw, Charles Gibson, Anderson Cooper, Brian Williams, or Tom King are liberals, conservatives, socialists, or anarchists.

wow!  you are just joking with us, right?? :lol:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I would not know since I do not spend my time listening to those people. I have no idea if Tom Brokaw, Charles Gibson, Anderson Cooper, Brian Williams, or Tom King are liberals, conservatives, socialists, or anarchists.


OK, I'll help you out there. They are ultra liberal, perhaps socialists. Many are socialists.



> There is a free seminar this evening in Bismarck on global climate change that will feature Will Steger, a renowed polar explorer.


I can tell you what he will say right now. He knows where his best chance of funding is at. Soooooo. Even though last year was the coldest for a long time he will have a picture of a lost looking Polar Bear on an ice flow. Science has to find funding. There is only one way to do that. Get someone to buy your story. Still, I wish I was around to hear it.

The big problem with global climate change is it has become so political that the truth can not be sorted out any longer. Today it helps a lot if you know the scientist personally. There are three kinds out there I think. Those that don't know what's happening so design a study to find out, those that think they know whats going on and design a study to prove it, but follow the data no matter what it says, and those who think they know what is going on and manipulate the data with every statistical formula known to man to prove their point, and that they were right all along. Until you know them you don't know which type they are.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> OK, I'll help you out there. They are ultra liberal, perhaps socialists. Many are socialists.


Sorry, Plainsman. No free pass for you. You can't make broad statements like this without some evidence to back it up. Examples, please.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

BigDaddy said:


> > OK, I'll help you out there. They are ultra liberal, perhaps socialists. Many are socialists.
> 
> 
> Sorry, Plainsman. No free pass for you. You can't make broad statements like this without some evidence to back it up. Examples, please.


wow, you don't have cable at your house do you big daddy?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Sorry, Plainsman. No free pass for you. You can't make broad statements like this without some evidence to back it up. Examples, please


Examples????? Listen to them. Compare the ways they present the news with alternate sources. Look at the way the crucified Bush as compared to the way they worship Obama. I often hear people say we need an open mind, but some of those same people are very closed. Look at how they treat some people compared to others etc. It's crystal clear.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Sorry Plainsman, but you are speaking in generalities. A danger in any political discussion is the fact that folks eventually begin speaking in generalities, and others eventually assume it must be true. Some might call this rhetoric.

You called these newspeople ultraliberal. If this is true, it should be easy to come up with at least a handful of examples of them slanting a story to be pro-liberal.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'll simply leave it up to others to make the comparison of how the media has treated people. If they keep an open mind I think they will come to the same conclusion I have. If not, oh well. It's to clear to me to spend time looking for examples in writing. I see it every day.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

BigDaddy said:


> > First off the media when polled a few years ago by their own admission were 90% liberal. So that's not drinking kool-aid.
> 
> 
> Let's be clear about that poll that conservatives point to time and time again. Ninety percent of the individuals polled were reported to have liberal tendencies. The survey did not say taht 90% of the media sources were liberal. Big difference.
> ...


Wow, just wow.

Big Daddy if I've ever seen a post dripping with "liberal arrogance" this is it.

Astounding.

huntin1


----------



## gst (Jan 24, 2009)

Only dripping???? I was ready to start sandbagging!!! 
BD So you're claiming intelectual geniuses like Obermann and Schultz are left leaning why????

Perhaps if your liberal friends could actually make up their minds on something, and make a commitment to what is right or wrong, they wouldn't have to keep going to these "meetings". Sadly this last election after 2 full years of a constant barrage of political information, this countrys fate was decided by these "undecideds" as the media called them, people that just couldn't make up their mind what was "best" for this country. Thanks alot!!!

As to your adequate demand theory, How do you explain O'Riley and Fox News dominating the ratings for so long? It's too bad these "undecideds" weren't tuned in or reading the "right" books!!!


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

huntin1 wrote:



> Wow, just wow.
> 
> Big Daddy if I've ever seen a post dripping with "liberal arrogance" this is it.
> 
> Astounding.


My computer must be broken. I have seen some of the arrogant posts from conservatives bashing liberals such as this one from Bowstring in his May 7 string titled "Talking with liberals is frustrating":



> Talking with liberals is frustrating, because you can't just talk about facts. That will only get them all upset, and all they will get out of the experience is never to listen to people like you. Most liberals live in their heads, or in little fluffy white clouds floating right above their scalps and resist efforts to engage them in rational conversation.


huntin1, I can't find a post from you on that string calling the comments arrogant, even though they imply that conservatives are more rational. Can I assume that you'll get right on that? How about you gst?

Or, is this a one-way street?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Or, is this a one-way street?


Not at all, but I agree with bowstring.  Since this is about language have you ever noticed how liberals say they feel something should be done, and conservatives will tell you what they think should be done? Feel as in touchy feely, and think, those words tell me how both brains are working. I would expect liberals to form organizations to seek donations to help the poor and the old. I notice in congress that the republicans give more to charity, so you might want to target them. If you need someone to run security you might want to enlist a conservative. If you want someone to run a business you might want to hire a conservative. If you want a good nurse you might want a liberal, but watch her. She might want to drain some blood from Frank and siphon it off to Bill if Bill is looking a little pale.

Now I would really like liberals if they could keep from robbing the productive to give to so many who really don't need it. I also wish their tolerance was of mainstream America, but they bend so far to be tolerant that they are more tolerant of societies dregs. They even condemn the good people for not accepting really bad people. Good ideas carried to far. I think everyone should be equal, but today your more equal if your gay, black, female, what's next? Will you be better if your a ????? I don't think we should celebrate diversity I think we should celebrate what we have in common.

Liberals see conservatives as greedy because they want to keep the money they earn. Conservatives consider liberals greedy because they want to take the money conservatives earned and give to some who need it and more who don't. The lead liberals have learned they can purchase votes by taking money from the conservatives and giving it to those who need it, but if they give it to those who don't need it they can get even more votes. So who is greedy? The person who wants to keep his money, the politician who takes it away for votes, or the person who doesn't need it but votes for the politician who will rob the productive in the form of taxes?

I don't consider myself republican of democrat, but I want to keep the money I earn. I sure do not respect the lazy slob that thinks he is entitled to what I earn. Entitled ----- back to that liberal language again. Entitled hmmmm, what makes a person entitled to the fruits of another mans labor and sweat? Entitled hmmmm. We sure have a lot of entitlements today don't we? Who would deny anyone something the are entitled to? Hmmmmm. Language control, Marx, liberals, hmmmm.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Big Daddy, you can assume anything you like. But, he's right, talking with liberals is frustrating.......no, exasperating.

This comment,


> my liberal friends read more, listen more, converse more, and frankly think more about the world and the country....


Is the biggest crock of BS I've read in a long time. What you are saying here is that you and your liberal friends are better educated than I. And you and your liberal friends care more about this country than I. At least, that is the way it appears.

Perhaps what you and your liberal friends need to do is actually read, and listen a bit more, then maybe you would realize what your liberal cronies in Washinton are doing to this country that you claim to think so much about.

It's glaringly apparent to conservatives.

huntin1


----------

