We've been dealing with this asshole since 1985

[calimary]

72. Welcome to DU, Catch2.2!

That's the whole problem, though. We as a nation are not feeling well. We are ill. We have norquist disease. I'm trying to think up a good word for it, like romnesia for wrongney. But he is a disease. An opportunistic infection that has blighted most of the country, kinda like a political Dutch Elm Disease.

And yes, I'm attempting, in my word and phrase choices, to dehumanize and minimize him. To make him a thing. All the easier to despise.

And remember that - quite literal - "war of words." The newt gingriches and frank luntzes of the world have thought up all these verbal devices to help paint the correct word pictures to get the desired meanings across to the unsuspecting targets (ie: ordinary citizens and potential low-information voters). They do focus group testing of words, phrases, concepts, slogans, and figure out just the exact perfect ways to convey messages. What words and phrases don't just say something, they INFER or IMPLY or SUGGEST. It's almost like subliminal advertising.

Words and phrases are carefully analyzed and categorized as to whether they're positive or negative connotations. Words with positive meanings or associations are deliberately and purposefully to be used when speaking of things or concepts or individuals that are supposed to be regarded positively. The same exercise is done with more negative words and phrases. Those are, in turn, supposed to be used whenever referring to something you don't like and you want to turn others against as well.

gingrich had a whole book full of them, developed through his GOPAC during the early 80s when he rode into Congress on reagan's coattails. For all things CONservative, regressive, republi-CON, or GOP-related, you were told to use positive words to associate them with. Words like "family," "American," "concerned citizens," "freedom," "liberty," "people of faith," "traditional," "hard-working," "God-fearing," and more. For all things Democratic or liberal or progressive - oppositional or negative words and phrases were used like "socialism," "hippie," "limousine liberals," "the looney left," "tree-huggers," "unAmerican," "godless," and worse. What used to drive me mad was that the term "do-gooder" was actually a put-down. A put-down!?!!!?!?!?!???? Doing good is a negative thing? Since when??????????????????? But yeah. It was. It was a derogatory term. One step lower than "nanny state." But in a "You're On Your Own" world, or an IGMFU world (I Got Mine, F-U), we can't have this "kum-by-ya" crap. Even "kum-by-yah" is a put-down. So is "peacenik." And "women's libber." Some of us were demeaned by the use of the term "bra-burner."

frank luntz and others were the ones who focus-group-tested all these words and phrases to see what registered and how. They made a science out of it.

So - if you wanna change the tax laws or cut taxes or whatever, the word "tax" has to be rendered SECURELY negative. Why not attach
the word "relief" to the word tax - because the phrase "tax relief" implies that taxes are something bad from which one yearns for relief. Notice, in the last few years - since Obama became president - the phrases "job-creating" and "job-killing" have been added to everything from legislation to toilet paper brands to actual people. Slap "job-creating" on any crap-ass legalized piracy legislation and BOOM! Instantly you have this nice little mental sticky-note or audio earwig that's gonna bury itself into your tissues and take root, and make itself a nice permanent home. BOOM! "Job-creating" - whatever it's attached to suddenly becomes something good, positive, desireable, admired, coveted, something to be hailed, promoted, protected, increased, accellerated, enforced, even worshipped. "Job-creating!" Hey, says the low-information viewer/listener. Well, THAT thing creates jobs! Must HAVE! And on the flip side, a "job-killing" fill-in-the-blank-here is a total negative, toxic, a loser, an undesireable, a poopy-head (to quote the ever-eloquent overflowing bathtub candidate), and something to be avoided, hated, defied, ignored, demeaned, scorned, bad-mouthed, minimized, vilified, brought down, destroyed.

They've been on this for at least 30 years. More like 40, I think, 'cause reagan didn't just arrive, fully-formed, on a half-shell on the ocean waves. A lot went into building him and the favorable, fertile environment of the national mindset in which he was to be planted. lee atwater was at work back then and there have already been clips of him giving lectures about effective wording and phrasing. In one clip, he referred to what we now all recognize as dog-whistles, describing how people used to use the "n-word" regarding the racist feelings they had, but you really couldn't say stuff like that in polite company anymore, so you could say OTHER things - like "states' rights" and so forth, to subtly telegraph what you meant to say, and other fellow racists who felt as strongly about the rectitude - even nobility - of their own racism and had no intention of changing their views would understand your message very clearly. And if they didn't, you keep on doing this and they'll pick up on it soon enough. It used to be NOT respectable to be greedy and selfish. Once even regarded as sinful. But these lovely folks changed all that and made it respectable - through this lexicon they developed and the way they evangelized it across the American political and social landscape.

It's the money talking. The corporations et al. The free-marketeers. The rich. They've bristled against the New Deal for decades, because it leveled the playing field, and deep-down, the captains of "the sanctity of competition" hate that more than anything. THEY want the upper hand, the edge, the fix. They want the game rigged so they win. Fairness for all is no fair to them. The more level the playing field, the more the OTHER guy has an even shot at winning, and we can't have that if we're to claw our own unimpeded personal way to the top of the ziggurat. So basically all these annoying "rights" and "programs" and "benefits" and "entitlements" that the rich and elites don't need because they already have PLENTY in all those departments, are bad things. They must be done away with. After all, ayn rand says we're entitled to keep everything and we're not supposed to have to share or make a little room for anybody else.

For example, ever wonder why it's the CONservatives who want to do away with affirmative action? It's total IGMFU. clarence thomas, for example, was MORE than happy to avail himself of all the advantages that affirmative action offered - in its design to help level the playing field and give those who'd been historically shut out a chance to get inside. But once HE got in, he wanted to shut the door and lock it behind him so nobody else could get in after him, and make use of those advantages he used.

These assholes have been at this Satan's Work FOR DECADES. It's perception management. The main objective was to make this shit respectable so it would be much easier, even to the point of being systemic, to enact their agenda into law - and preferably into the Constitution. They've been working on this for a LONG time, trying to change the nation's views from progressive to CONservative. Trying to push the pendulum as far as they can to their side and then tie it in place there. They infuse the mind with positive and negative associations to things - and then the job is done. The impressions are made, and they stick. It's almost like they've made your mind into a mine-field.

At least there are more people waking up to this, and recognizing it as a fact. These are the building blocks of that alternate reality we've known about, and fought against, for years, and that the mainstream media and other Pox Noise/limbaugh critics have only just recently discovered. Thank Heavens the awakening has finally begun.

What WE have to do is make sure nobody dozes off again.


Aw, crap. Glad you're here! Sorry to be so long-winded.