As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Red Alert! Liberals Winning the War of Words

Are you a climate change denier? Busy waging war on women? An obstructionist? Wing nut? Do you oppose COMMON SENSE SOLUTIONS?

Liberals have an endless series of epithets for conservatives – and euphemisms for themselves – that they’ve deployed from their linguistic arsenal to great effect. Much of it is dishonest, and good portion mean-spirited too. Conservatives shouldn’t sink to their level, of course, but maybe it’s time for them to fight back a little harder.

That’s the theme of my latest piece for Reuters, Liberals are winning the language war. I hope you’ll take a look!


18 Responses to Red Alert! Liberals Winning the War of Words

  1. Your 2nd paragraph is spot on Keith.
    Conservatives do not have to sink to their level, rather, we raise the bar.
    At least to the common sense level.

  2. Good grief. I tried three times to comment on the Reuter’s site with my Google account, no go. Sorry.
    I meant to give a wordy “thumbs Up” to counter the meanie comments made by obvious anti-Semetic, racist White haters, and people who just hate Repubs for one reason or another. (shudder)
    You’re on the mark and part of the reason the words or phrases matter is that Americans are conditioned to follow logos, or phrases to identify products and people. Branding is the word, the means of success.

    Part of the problem with the Repubs is the message of a “smaller, less intrusive government’ doesn’t fly with those dependent of everything in their lives from a government entity. They believe they will suffer if the myriad of government goodies are curtailed; Social Security checks will be reduced, our military will be put in mothballs, no one will fix the roads or educate our children.
    This is how the Dems define ‘smaller’ government. No one, on either side, explains that cutting budgets will probably result in less waste, less foolish purchases, no posh resort meetings, a more mean/lean military that cuts the perks to the brass who live like pobahs.

    Then, of course, who’s going to give the Repubs the public platform to explain all these things, FOX? Will CBS/NBC et al allow the Repubs to tell the people what they propose and how it will improve all our lives or our future?
    Nah. Won’t happen, and that’s the gist of the word war. The Repubs talk in the halls of Congress to FOX during working hours, and the President talks from the WhiteHouse and gets national coverage on the evening news.

    • Wish I could add to that. Just one thing. The cute, simpleton quips and phrases used by the “dims” (sic) play to their base. We have nor want anything similar. And their base usually doesn’t understand English beyond – ah, but, like, ya know, etc.

      • It comes down to who defines the issue first, in my opinion. That is where the ad men and slumlords of Chi-town got the jump on us in 2008. Clinton was defined away (likeable enough) and Obama put in her place–Messiah, lightbringer, to be best pres since Roosevelt (with no evidence). Reps were hit with the war on women thing–and the Dems established the nice to sex-minded law students and other women thing. I know perfectly intelligent women who believe that. Now, I think they are also getting away with preemptive strikes against Reps–all they say is no no no, they want to push Granny, etc. It’s all messaging. If only we could establish them as deceitful, weak, and wasteful–but that would take a fair press.

  3. Wonderful article, Keith. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

    I’ve been saying for at least the last six months that every conservative should refer to Obamacare as “the Obamacare scam”. Say it again and again to get the message across that we have all been scammed by this horrendous monstrosity that was forced upon us by Obummer and his Demons.

    It might also be a good idea to keep hammering away that it’s the UNafforable Care Act”. Also, conservatives should repeatedly refer to the fact that it’s “mandatory”, “one size fits all” health insurance coverage that has removed our “rights” to “choose” for ourselves and our families what we need, want, and can afford.

  4. Liberals began winning the war when they managed to replace sex when discussing men and women with ‘gender,’ a word previously describing the sexes grammatically; i.e.:he, she, his,hers, etc. They followed that success by replacing homosexual with ‘gay,’ co-opting another perfectly suited word to its previous meaning.

  5. Outstanding article MrKoffler.
    I’m in agreement with you that we don’t have to resort to the vile name calling that the Dem’s rely on that evokes a Pavlovian nodding of head’s and agreement from their constituents.
    ObamaCare, Fast & Furious, unsecured border, Benghazi and now the Reid scandal. No need for name calling.

  6. Well done Keith. It really is important — language, how it is used and branding. That said, my head spins when I read a response like this:
    “Obstructionists – Obstruction goes well beyond a simple ideological stand. If you cannot tell the difference between Republican obstructionism and a principled stand on issues, then you will _never_ be able to understand why you are losing not only on messaging but in actually having solutions to modern societal issues. Since this conclusion is all but foregone, it almost makes trying to have a civilized discussion meaningless, doesn’t it?”
    What is obstructionism? What is being obstructed rather than opposed by the party? What is the difference between Republican obstructionism and a principled stand on issues? What is the criteria that defines a principled stand?

    It makes me dizzy. So, off to the tea trolley….

    • The comments on the web page were of course hysterical.
      All Liberals are Jews.
      All Neo-cons are Jews.
      All conservatives are angry Christians.

      These are the same people who think saying, “Islamists” is uncalled for because it says that there are terrorists who are Islamic.

  7. OT. Apparently Obama and Putin had a telecon today. Here is the Fox Report of it.

    Particularly ironic is this:
    Late Sunday, the U.S. State Department issued a statement titled, “Russian Fiction: The Sequel, 10 More False Claims about Ukraine.”

    The document was intended to be a followup to Obama saying last month: “No amount of propaganda can make right something that the world knows is wrong.”

    The document in part states Russia falsely claims its agents are not in the Ukraine and that the pro-Russia demonstrations are composed exclusively of Ukrainian citizens acting of their own volition.
    Obama certainly can speak to propaganda and if we look back at Benghazi, also knows a few things about false claims.

  8. It’s official, the comments at Reuters think you are a right-wing propagandist-master obfuscator. In other words…You nailed it!

    Keep up the good work, Keith.

    • Some other phrases Liberals in Power like to use:
      “Undocumented Workers” – because “no human being is illegal”. Of course “illegal immigrant” can’t possibly mean that the person immigrated illegally.
      “Subpar” – that means anything they don’t like and think is not as good as something they want to replace it with.
      “Deficit Reduction” – It doesn’t mean the yearly deficit will start reducing the debt. It means that they will be in the red by less than last year. Since $1 Trillion add spending is less than $1.1 Trillion that’s called deficit reduction.
      “Everyone” – Means everyone important to their fundraising or voting.
      “Tolerance” also “Diversity” – means intolerance of ideas or thoughts of people who are not liberals.
      “Racist” – Anyone who says anything against a liberal black person. Hmm…wasn’t MLK a Republican?