Obama & The English Language
There are three important truths regarding Orwell’s observation: It pertains not to one year or era but to all time. The corruption that underlies it is destructive of much more than discourse. Its implicit warning becomes especially relevant when a politician cleverly employs language to elicit a cult-like response from a perfectly faithful flock he anoints as part of a "movement.”
Barack Obama is exactly such a politician. Therefore, today, it is absolutely essential to imitate Orwell not only by enumerating examples of Obama's duplicity but also by exposing his "real aims” in clear, precise, plain language.
"invest”
Even the person who pays scant attention to politics knows that with respect to economic policy, Barack Obama invokes this term ad nauseam. But what is Obama really saying when he squirts a thousand inky invests instead of speaking clearly and honestly about the enormous spending he proposes for a flood of new programs and expansions of existing ones?
Let’s answer that question by using Plain English to express what Obama really says about taxes, spending, and debt:
"I believe federal taxes are too low.”
"I believe in the liberal dogma of tax, spend, and borrow. Indeed, the politically moderate Tax Policy Center is absolutely correct to point out that in addition to ‘taxing the rich,’ my spending plans will require the federal government to borrow three trillion dollars.”
"I believe in the Marxist notion of income redistribution. That’s why as part of my ‘tax cut for the middle class,’ I intend to institute a permanent government handout to tens of millions who pay no income tax whatsoever.”
"Despite the current financial crisis, I will not back off my leftist economic beliefs. In fact, I agree completely with Robert Reich, who has written that despite the current economic situation, the next president will find himself in an excellent position to greatly increase federal spending.”
Let us now turn to what Barack Obama really means when he describes his entire energy policy by saying merely that he will "invest” in new technologies.
"I know there are severe limits upon the amount of affordable ‘new technology energy’ our nation can produce in the next ten years.”
"I know that without new production the price of gasoline and natural gas is certain to increase, likely doubling or tripling from current levels in just the next 5 to 10 years.”
"Nevertheless, I disagree that our nation needs to establish a ‘bridge’ to an independent, affordable energy future. That disagreement explains why I oppose drilling for new oil and gas and the construction of nuclear power plants.”
"That disagreement also explains why I support my fellow Democrats who, for political gain, voted for offshore drilling but sabotaged any chance for that drilling to occur by denying states royalties from new oil and gas production.”
"I openly acknowledge that much of the energy ‘investment’ I speak of consists of providing a federal handout to well-off Americans who can afford to purchase extremely expensive energy systems. Yes, my energy ‘investments’ require ordinary folks to subsidize ‘green energy for the rich.’”
"When I say ‘Yes, we can’ about the nation’s profound energy problem, I really mean ‘I hope we can.’ In addition, I admit that my ‘energy hope’ is identical to the ‘mortgage hope’ exhibited by congressional Democrats who forced financial institutions to approve extremely high risk mortgages.”
"Finally, regarding energy and all other problems, I defend my ‘I hope we can’ attitude by arguing that I don’t want to make the mistake Ben Franklin made when he stupidly warned that ‘He that lives upon hope will die fasting.’”
"deregulation,” "Wall Street”
The lack of modern regulatory policies vigorously enforced by the federal government and the arrogant, pathological greed and stupidity exhibited by Wall Street big shots represent two of the three causes of the current financial debacle. The following will explain why we never hear Barack Obama speak of the cause that paved the way for the two just mentioned.
"No matter how much pain they contribute to the nation’s current suffering, I agree wholeheartedly with the laws, policies, and pressures promulgated and applied by politicians such as Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and other congressional liberals who forced Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and banks to give mortgages to people who did not have 20% to put down and the ability to pay.”
"Because of the excellent job he did advancing the agenda of the liberals mentioned above, I refuse to condemn former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines.”
"I so much admire the job James Johnson has done as a long-time, big-time Democratic operative and eight-year CEO of Fannie Mae that despite the fact he received loans from bad-mortgage-swamped Countrywide Financial, I named him to head my search for a running mate.”
"For political gain, I will happily condemn the greed of Wall Street CEO’s. However, you will never hear me resoundingly condemn dangerous, radical organizations such as ACORN, whose mortgage agenda and voter registration plans I enthusiastically supported and for which I did legal work.”
"Neither will you hear me condemn by name the hedge fund big shots and investors whose rapacious stock market manipulation has caused ordinary Americans to lose billions. Nor will I return the huge sums they have contributed to my ‘movement.’”
"associations”
Thomas Sowell points out that "Associations are very different from alliances. . . You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you.”
Clearly, Barack Obama has made a number of alliances with truly obnoxious persons and organizations. However, he and his supporters continually defend those alliances by arguing against "guilt by association.” Here, then, in Plain English, is what the Senator actually says about one of those "associations.”
"I am fully aware that as recently as 2001, Bill Ayres, the far-left radical and unrepentant former member of the terrorist Weather Underground said, ‘I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.’”
"Nevertheless, I considered it no big deal to keep campaign funds Ayers raised for me. Moreover, I considered it no big deal to serve with Ayres on a destined-for-failure project to improve education for Chicago’s children by subjecting them to the R of radic-lib propaganda rather than educating them about the three R’s.”
"When I am asked about my alliances with Mr. Ayres, I spray the same ink my wife did when she responded to a question from Larry King with ‘I don’t know anyone in Chicago who’s heavily involved in education policy who doesn’t know Bill Ayers.’”
"As you can see, through my example, I encourage all my supporters to obfuscate the truth about my alliance with Ayres by trotting out the oldest of arrogant, insulting, incestuous liberal tricks, the one that asks, ‘Doesn’t everyone?’”
"Of course, I’m sophisticated enough to know that not everyone in America would jump at the chance to peddle leftist radicalism to children if doing so means they have the great honor of working with Bill Ayres. But that’s because far too many Americans cling to religion, guns, and that most contemptible support of all to liberals like me — middle class values.”
The foregoing doesn’t come close to covering the perversion of the English language exhibited by a messianic politician who is the most unaccomplished (not "best prepared”), most radically liberal (not "most thoughtfully mature”), most old school political machine nurtured (not "most fresh and new”), most disgustingly allied (not "most wholesomely guy next door”) candidate ever to be nominated for the presidency by one of the two major parties.
However, what has been presented should be sufficient to demonstrate that when a politician perverts language as thoroughly and insidiously as Barack Obama does, he poses a threat to a great deal more than the quality of one election cycle’s political discourse. |
