One thing notable about the left is their language. They never actually speak directly about something, they call it names.Without saying what their plan is, they declare it “reasonable”. They describe something like playing charades. They want to associate good feelings with whatever their position is. So they use adjectives and describe it in attractive terms. That is usually a dead give away a Democrat is speaking.
And it seems to me the harder they pursue that approach the more Marxist or socialist they are. Their language is also loaded with code words. One cannot miss them, which is the point, they are meant to be obvious.
This is a common tactic on amnesty and illegal immigration, or other issue. You never get the specifics. So you get Nancy telling us we have to pass a bill before you can find out what is in it. Even they will acknowledge they don’t know what is in it before hand. However, they do know all the key terms to describe it. And everyone knows them.
It’s like they are doing an ad for a new Iphone. They cannot tell you exactly what something is but they can tell you how to feel about it. As if as long as you feel the right way about it, the contents don’t matter.
Of course that is just one reason they play that word salad game. There are others like when they attack conservatives or “right-wingers” they want to paint them as bad as they can. So out come the adjectives — from nasty, to bigoted, to hate-filled, to racist.
A friend of mine had several exchanges in the letters to the editor of a newspaper. A Liberal Democrat, who inhabits the pages like his private villa, uses all the typical tactics of the left. The talking points and code words flow like a cheap novel. Almost as if he can’t help himself, he characterizes anyone who disagrees in typical Left-wing vernacular. It definitely is a word salad, you can spot it immediately.
Picture Jonestown and Jim Jones using the term kool-aid for the poison. No wonder the term stuck. A sampling of left-wing dialect might include, but is not limited to, any of the following or combinations.
Level playing field
Fair-share (any hyphenated “fair” word)
War on women
Fact (used vaguely or as a pejorative)
There’s a larger list of attack words for their opponents. Not to mention their cliches.
Now, on the same language topic, let’s try a little hypothetical. Suppose Congress got Lois Lerner, or other operative, to testify on any scandal. It might look something like this.
Ask any question and they say they don’t know. Let’s begin:
(Q= questioner / A= testifier)
Q: what did you know about …….
A: “I don’t know”
Q: Why don’t you know”
A: I don’t know”
Q: You have to know why you don’t know because…
A: I told you I don’t know.
Q: Look, the rules and law say that in your position you have to know these things, but you say you don’t know?
A: I must not have to know because I don’t.
Q: It’s not possible that you don’t know anything.
A: You are trying to tell me something I don’t know.
Q: I would not do that
A: You just did
Q: All I want to know is what you know about ___.
A: If you want to know what I know, then why do you keep asking me what I don’t know?
Q: But I’m not asking you what you don’t know I’m asking what you do know?
A: I don’t know anything…. and I know what I don’t know.
Q: If you know what you don’t know then you obviously know everything.
A: (blank stare)
Q: You don’t know much do you?
A: Well, I’m sure I don’t know
Q: That just proves it, you do know.
A: I don’t know everything but I know what I don’t know!
Q: See, you do know, and think you know everything. — I yield back…
A: …Do not !!!!!!!!! Stop trying to tell me something I don’t know.
Chair: Shut up ….or you’ll be in contempt !
Now that concludes our job interview, you passed the test.
A: I’d like to exercise my 5th amendment privileges now.
RightRing | Bullright