Word Games

“Like most political topics [in the US] the debate is relatively non-existent.  Once you identify pro or con on the subject, the other side assumes they know your feelings and arguments and immediately begins either attempting to convert you or demonize you for your beliefs.”

This struck a cord with me because of how true I feel it is. Why is this? What is a society that does debate more productively? What would you like to see happen and might it happen? Any thoughts are welcome.

My definition of debate; respectful conversation that might lead one or both sides to see the full scope of an issue and agree on a best choice in the matter. -Timothy A Walker

Advocacy is the norm.  Unlike debate, advocacy can be effective sans facts.  Good advocacy works on our reason, emotion and the character of everyone involved is a consideration too.

Unlike debate, advocacy shares a lot of common ground with propaganda and is very easily abused.

There has been a consistent reduction of clarity in news, linked to misinformation, that favors advocacy forms of dialog.  Infotainment is advocacy.

The lack of clarity norms renders debate lofty,inaccessible and boring essentially.

We need advocacy and we need debate.  I believe the real answer to this is a sharp increase in clarity norms, which would favor good advocacy and frame it as the gateway to debate instead of being the gateway to misinformation and polarization is most often is now.

Clarity is a non partisan common interest we all should have.—Doug Dingus

In the 1980s there was a TV show called “Not Necessarily The News” on HBO that featured something called “sniglets.” (Hosted by Bob Saget). Although it’s probably a hate-crime to say the word “sniglet” out loud now and will get you accused of homophone-a-phobia, a sniglet is a word that should appear in the dictionary but doesn’t. Sniglets have all but disappeared, but the dictionary itself might as well be thrown out too. Words that had unambiguous meanings for decades or even centuries have seen those definitions changed by progressives in the name of political correctness.

To make sure you are up to date on which words and phrases are now permissible, I’ve assembled a few here that have seen their definitions change so you don’t get accused of being an “Ist-a-phobe” at the water cooler come Monday.

Thug: noun.
Old meaning: a violent criminal.
New meaning: a racial slur; the same as the “n-word.”
Source: Tonight Show band leader Questlove in a tweet this week and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: upriser, revolutionary, victim, misguided young people, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When referencing the bad guys in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and when talking about white hockey players Food Stamps: noun.
Old meaning: a small document that is given by the government to poor people and that can be used to buy food.
New meaning: a racial slur; “code” for black people.
Source: Democrats in the 2012 election deemed pointing out the fact there are more people on food stamps under President Obama than at any point in American history to be “racial code.” It being a fact was deemed irrelevant.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: economically challenged, differently fed, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When calling for greater funding for the program or when accusing a Republican of wanting to “gut” the program.

Budget cut: noun.
Old meaning: the act of reducing budgeted expenditures.
New meaning: a reduction in the rate of increase in spending where more money is spent than the prior year but slightly less than previously projected; draconian gutting of vital programs, particularly for poor and minority people.
Source: The Democratic Party and the mainstream media.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: There is no alternative; reducing, or even proposing a reduction in the rate of increase of government spending, is racist.
Acceptable uses: The term is not only allowed to be used when talking about spending on national defense, it is required.

Urban: adjective.
Old meaning: of or relating to cities and the people who live in them.
New meaning: racist code for “black people.”
Source: Every progressive everywhere.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: Underrepresented communities, victims.
Acceptable uses: Only when giving the full name of a country singer or talking about an awful store selling clothes for white suburban hipsters.

Progressive: adjective.
Old meaning: Political philosophy based on the belief that some people are intellectually and genetically superior to others and should, therefore, be able to exercise power over everyone else, up to and including who can live or reproduce.
New meaning: tolerant, loving, smart, caring.
Source: The Democratic Party (which also was the source of the original definition but now chooses to pretend otherwise) and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary None. Even though the philosophy was created by those who literally advocated for the extermination of “undesirable” people (minorities and poor, uneducated whites), people proudly call themselves progressive without consequence.

Tolerance: noun.
Old meaning: willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own.
New meaning: Conformity; the belief that the only acceptable thoughts are those that adhere to a progressive philosophy.
Source: The Democratic Party, College professors, pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. There is no need to remove this word from your vocabulary, but it is important to remember it means only the new definition. Any deviation from the new meaning to the old one will be met with protests, boycotts and potential massive fines from government.

Diversity: noun.
Old meaning: the quality or state of having many different forms, types, ideas, etc.
New meaning: different colored, like-minded drones. It no longer applies to the ideas or thoughts, only skin color. This word particularly does not apply to black or Hispanic conservatives.
Source: The Democratic Party, the mainstream media and pretty much everyone on (the mostly white) MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. You must not question this concept, only blindly accept it. To point out the hypocrisy of rich, white liberal progressives living in gated communities extolling the virtues of diversity is a near hate-crime.
I hope this small but important list helps you navigate our brave new world. Should you find yourself violating these suggestions by saying something like, “Well, progressive Democrats and their policies have pretty much had unfettered reign in the most violent and economically depressed areas of the country for generations and things have only gotten worse,” the only hope for redemption is a donation to a progressive organization that sells “indulgences.”

The most popular indulgence sellers are the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. Donations are tax deducible and you can rest assured that your money will be put to good use, not wasted on frivolities like accurate record keeping or paying taxes. (Derek Hunter)

Don’t do as They do, do as they say. OR ELSE!

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The Unhappy People

Republicans are the party of hate. I know this because the media tells me so. You didn’t know? Did you miss a meeting or something?

ReThuglicans are trying to destroy the country’s economy, oppress minorities, drive gay people into the sea and literally destroy the planet. That is, after all, why Ronald Reagan created crack cocaine and AIDS and why the Koch brothers exist, right?

Those are all incredibly stupid statements, but they’re also perhaps exaggerated versions of statements various factions within the Democratic Party’s coalition believe and Democratic leaders espouse.

If ignorance truly was bliss, you’d think progressives and the Democratic base would be among the happiest people in the world. But they’re not. They’re miserable people obsessed with the prospect that someone, somewhere, is having a type of fun they don’t approve of or making more money than someone else. In short: not living in a manner expressly endorsed by leftists.

In a fit of hilarity to anyone who knows history, Democrats routinely attack Republicans for “representing the past,” for “having no new ideas” while espousing and implementing policies that date back to the beginning of the 20th century and have failed everywhere they’ve been tried.

How could they do this? How could they get away with this and fool so many people into believing proven lies?

Democrats don’t debate history. They don’t debate facts. They don’t engage. Democrats accuse.

Like the guy in Times Square playing 3-Card Monte, progressives want to keep the attention on everything but what they’re actually doing.

With President Obama touting failures such as Obamacare as wonderful success stories, no one in the mainstream media is bothering to cover the millions upon millions of Americans who are demonstrably worse off because of the law.

Politics, thanks to the media and the Democratic Party, have become a con game. And we’re all the marks.

When in doubt, when boxed into a corner and someone is on the verge of spotting the red queen in your palm, break out the “ists” and “phobes.”

Racist, sexist and homophobe are the weapons of choice for the Left. Not the weapons of last resort, mind you. These are the first and usually only weapons they use. Where facts should live, only charges of hate reside. And it works.

More than 30 states have Religious Freedom Restoration Acts to protect people of faith from state governments mandating their citizens do things that violate their deeply held religious beliefs. It’s not a permission slip to hate or to discriminate, but you’d never know that by the coverage of Indiana joining those other states this week. But don’t take my word for it, take the word of pro-gay marriage Indiana University law professor Daniel Conkle.

In spite of the fact that almost three dozen states have similar laws, none of which have ended up in the wholesale hunting down of gay people nor any discrimination, the media set about lying to instill fear and anger in the hearts of Americans.

Huffington Post ran a story by blogger Amanda Terkel calling the law “anti-gay.” In it, Terkel writes “Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) quietly signed legislation…” then goes on to add enough qualifiers to twist the story so as to allow it to be “accurate” when no “anti-gay” actions result.

By the way, when Gov. Pence “quietly signed” the bill into law he tweeted a picture of the signing ceremony. That is akin to screaming a secret into the sound system from the 50-yard line at halftime of the Super Bowl. HuffPo is not known for letting facts stand in the way.

But progressive activist blogs weren’t the only ones content to lie about what happened in Indiana. CNN “journalist” Eric Bradner tweeted his story on the new law by saying, “Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signs law allowing businesses to reject gay customers in name of ‘religious freedom.’”

Aside from that not being remotely close to the truth, Bradner couldn’t help himself from putting the words “religious freedom” in quotes not only in his tweet but in the story itself. That’s why I put “journalist” in quotes when referring to CNN’s “politics reporter covering 2016.” Any GOP candidate who gives so much as a quote to this tool shed should be automatically disqualified from consideration.

Bradner’s “reporting” spread across the Internet like a cold on a plane. Contently uninformed progressives from the business world and the entertainment industry were outraged. Someone named Marc Benioff professed his company’s intention to wipe Indiana off its map. “Today we are canceling all programs that require our customers/employees to travel to Indiana to face discrimination,” the ignorant CEO tweeted.

Oddly, Benioff’s company, SalesForce, gladly does business with the progressive communists in China who imprison and murder its citizens for whatever reason they want, but Americans harming no one is a bridge too far.

The pudgy CEO wasn’t the only millionaire or billionaire to swallow the hook. I’m not going to link to any more of them because it would just give progressive websites money, but Apple CEO Tim Cook, Miley Cyrus, Ashton Kutcher and Mr. Sulu all called for boycotting Indiana. Unthinking minions followed suit, all led by a media that should know better.

They do know better. They just don’t care. The narrative, the progressive agenda, must be advanced.

Having moved on from their “hands up, don’t shoot” lie, some new outrage must be advanced to keep the mindless angry. It’s why the 3-Card Monte guy never stops talking…

Always ready to distract from her own troubles and jump on a left-wing bandwagon, Hillary Clinton tweeted, “Sad this new Indiana law can happen in America today. We shouldn’t discriminate against ppl bc of who they love #LGBT.”

Hero…

Personally, I agree with the man who, when he signed the federal version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, said, “We are a people of faith. We have been so secure in that faith that we have enshrined in our Constitution protection for people who profess no faith. And good for us for doing so. That is what the first amendment is all about. But let us never believe that the freedom of religion imposes on any of us some responsibility to run from our convictions. Let us instead respect one another’s faiths, fight to the death to preserve the right of every American to practice whatever convictions he or she has, but bring our values back to the table of American discourse to heal our troubled land.”

Of course that was a really, really long time ago, way back in 1993, and the man was President Bill Clinton. Something none of those “news” organizations, CEOs, celebrities or any member of the progressive flying monkey outrage army bothered to mention or probably even knew. Googling, like thinking, is too hard for some.

They’re content to label anyone who disagrees with them an “ist” or a “phobe” of some sort, so let’s just call ourselves “Ist-a-Phobes” and cut out the middleman. I’d rather be called that than “progressive” any day of the week.

On the plus side, progressives haven’t yet called for “camps” or mass executions of people who disagree with them. That’s a major step “forward” for them from the last century, so we’ve got that going for us. (Derek Hunter)

Give them time, though they already have the Education system to use and abuse so they don’t have to lock you up physically, just mentally so that you can’t escape. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson