almost as funnny as the RATs trying to decide what their "Core Values" are... (hint to you RAT's, if you have to decide what they are... you don't have any!!!)
Posted on 07/15/2005 2:53:32 PM PDT by bitt
NEW YORK The cover story by Matt Bai in the upcoming Sunday issue of The New York Times Magazine profiles the man some liberals allegedly consider a possible new “messiah” for the Democratic party, George Lakoff. An adviser to the party on “framing” issues, he wrote “Don't Think of an Elephant”-- a book about politics and language based on his own linguistic theories.
“Framing” is the process of choosing the best words to describe individual issues and characterize a debate. Bai hails Lakoff as the father of the concept. His ideas seemed to gain some success recently in putting the Bush social security proposals in peril. Next they will be severely tested in the upcoming fight over Supreme Court nominees.
Lakoff preaches that to understand language on the whole, one must first study how an individual would comprehend that language in terms of personal experience and thought processes. He also says that metaphors allow people to process abstract ideas.
And nobody better used this philosophy before, says Lakoff, than the Republicans. In the 2004 election, George W. Bush labeled John Kerry as a “flip flopper,” and repeated this throughout the duration of the campaign. He even put out an ad that featured Kerry windsurfing, back and forth, which hammered home this idea in a visual manner.
Democrats, on the other hand, tried to pin too many criticisms on Bush, none of which stuck. Thus, as Bai writes, “Bush was attacked. Kerry was framed.”
In the article, Lakoff says that Republicans are also skilled at using loaded language and repetition to create lasting concepts in our unconscious. This is largely in part to the work of Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster renowned for creating euphemism for conservative issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at editorandpublisher.com ...
'Delousing Van': Nazi Euphemism for Murder
A 1942 document which describes the installation of two large ovens at the 'bathing installations for special action' - a Nazi code-word for the homicidal gas chambers.
'Vergasungsapparate': Gassing as a 'Remedy' for Jews (Document NO-365)
Euthanasia: Nazi euphemism for the deliberate killings of institutionalized physically, mentally, and emotionally handicapped people. The euthanasia program began in 1939, with German nonJews as the first victims. The program was later extended to Jews.
Final Solution: A Nazi euphemism for the plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe.
Resettlement: German euphemism for the deportation of prisoners to killing centers in Poland.
almost as funnny as the RATs trying to decide what their "Core Values" are... (hint to you RAT's, if you have to decide what they are... you don't have any!!!)
I doubt that there's anything new here. It's the same basic idea the New Leftist Dems have been working with for the past twelve years or more. Not, "how can we change to appeal better to the voters," but "how can we repackage ourselves to look better to the voters."
Repackage, reframe; same old, same old.
TOP SECRET: Democrat Core Values
I saw his INFOmercial.
He is a skilled weasel with words but his tecnique is dependent on the ignorance of the desire to be gulable fo the listener.
There is no substance to his argument.
ie he says Republicans are strong father model, democrats are loving parent model. note no mother, the a-sexual "parent".
ie homosexual marriage is not about marriage it is about looooooove. TOTAL LEGAL BS, the law has NEVER considered love in marriage.
ie Tax relief is not right, tax FAIRNESS.
He also works on using left wing talking points as a factual assumption. such as, the USA is less secure, the USA squandered international credibility. IOW the USA should bow to the alter of UN (and france).
Word play with no substance.
He is a modern Goebles.
If your title is *Don't Think of an Elephant* aren't you telling people to think about elephants (Republicans) ??
While I may consider democRats just a slightly lighter version of communism, as a debate point your idea is VERY good.
I think this "guru" is akin to the democrats desperatly (an pathetically) looking for a lieftist rush limbaugh.
Perhaps the left is just playing to their core in a "me too" effort to prevent further collapse.
I had a class where this piece of partisan crockery was an ASSIGNED TEXT. And there was no competing text or right-wing book anywhere in the syllabus.
I dropped it. There's a difference between bias and outright indoctrination. Despite the claim that arguments and disagreements would be encouraged in the class(BS, get 3 bootlicker students to gang up on the one courageous libertarian or conservative.)
Yeah, one of the examples he uses in his book is the likely fictionalized account of a woman in AOL chat rooms who would respond to pro-lifers "if you don't believe in abortion, then you would be free to not choose to have one."
Yeah, unless of course we re'frame' it and say "if you don't believe in slavery you are free not to own a slave."
Puncturing such 'arguments' or manipulations of the language is something a high school sophomore should already be doing. Did Lakoff think this was something special?
Seriously, some of what he suggests is not only stupid but ignores the idea that maybe the Democrats(and leftists are wrong) and that words actually DO mean something. Or the fact that it was THEY who poisoned the language and it has to be retaken.
'Language alone is not enough to sell people on bad ideas. Except for really stupid people.'
Then the really stupid people are shown pictures while Dems scream "LIAR!" "He Preyed ON OUR FEARS!!"
The last FR thread about him, directly after his CSPAN appearance (and Rush's pointed ridicule of him the next day) drew all of eight responses. If the only new face the Democrats can bring to the table in 2008 is a retirement-age BS merchant from Bezerkley, then they are in deep trouble.
And so your argument is _____???
this guy again?
See my tagline.
No, no, that's James Bond you're thinking of.
In the interests of humor, I'd suggest that Lackoff and Chomsky "play for the other team". ;-)
1. Bigger government.
2. More taxes.
3. Abortion
Brings to mind the old Saturday Night live skit (maybe the Dukakis era) with a bunch of Democrat leaders at a party, and the live singer is crooning a folk song:
Unilateral disarmament
Abortion on Demand
Condoms for the kiddies
All Across the Land...
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.