« UPDATE: AFA Calls Off Boycott, As Wal-Mart Pledges Neutrality in Culture Wars | Main | NBC Renames Iraq War »

April 01, 2009

Leftist Terminology For The Next Two Years

We all know that the one thing Democrats can never do is be honest about their agenda. To make the items in their liberal agenda more palatable, they have to couch their true intentions in weasel words that attempt to mask the true liberalism that lies beneath. With San Fran Nan the Gay Pride queen and Dirty Land Deal Harry in charge, we'll need a little guide to help decipher the agenda behind the weasel words. This is just a greatly abbreviated version of some of the weasel words and phrases you will hear bandied about during the next two years living under the oppression of a Democratic legislative branch. It is by no means all-inclusive, merely covering some of the key phrases that have and will rear their ugly countenances in the next couple years. Here's to hoping that I won’t find myself having to revise and extend these definitions two years from now in the wake of a Hillary presidency.

Re-deploy: This is ABSCAM John Murtha's favorite word. There really is no such thing as "re-deploying" -- you either deploy, which we have already done in Iraq, or you don't deploy. Re-deploy is the weasel word that tells the world, if not the rest of us, what the liberals REALLY mean. The opposite of deploy is to retreat, surrender, pull out, cut and run. Think about it. The Democrats are talking about leaving Iraq to go somewhere else -- a costly, burdensome retreat that doesn't achieve ANY objective whatsoever except to reduce Iraq -- and the region -- to total chaos. Question: After this "re-deployment" in the War on Terror, where do we go next? Running home with our tail between our legs, that's where. And what of the terrorists? Well, according to the Democrats, they'll leave us alone if we'll just stop pissing them off. Yeah, right!

Women's health choices, a woman's "right" to choose, women being allowed to make their own "reproductive choices" -- you choose the weasel phrase here; it all means exactly the same thing: Killing an inconvenient baby.

The life of the mother -- this one goes hand in hand with the above phrase. This is when a woman doesn't decide to make her "reproductive choice" until the baby is damn near born and able to live on its own. So we pretend the life of the mother is at stake as an excuse to kill a baby minutes before it would otherwise be born alive. What we really mean, again, is that this is just another inconvenient baby, but an inconvenient baby that is a little farther along that the other one which in turn means we need some extra-special word manipulation to get this baby killed legally. What we're actually talking about is getting some weaselly doctor to certify that the mental health of the mother will be adversely affected if she has to deliver the baby live as opposed to having it killed first. What does the "mental health of the mother" mean? It means that it will just drive her crazy if she is forced to bring this little brat into the world alive. And there we have the convenient excuse to kill a viable full-term baby and call it legal. The liberals' weaselly justification for infanticide.

The richest people among us: This is the weasel phrase the liberals want to use to justify raising your taxes and mine -- a way of re-defining the middle class. Those of us who were paying attention during the Clinton presidential campaigns know that, using Clinton's tax tables, "the richest people among us" actually began at $30,000 for a single wage earner because $30,000 was when Clinton's tax increases kicked in for single folk. As far as the rest of us middle class folk go, it don't take much for two wage earners to earn more than $100,000 a year and most families that make $100,000 a year will tell you that $100,000 ain't that much. But if you are in this group and above, congratulations because you are among the top 10% of all taxpayers -- well in to the leftist category of "the richest among us". What does this mean? Among other things, it means that you are in the group that pays 66% of all income taxes. (By the way, if you are in the bottom 50%, you pay 3.5% of all income taxes). It also means that you have a huge target on your back -- the "we're going to raise taxes on the richest among us" target. When you hear that leftist phrase, grab your wallet, because the Democrats are coming to get it.

Working men and women: If you have risen up the ladder to a mid-management position or higher, this doesn't include you. We middle managers and administrative folk don't "work"; we oppress the poor working slob. According to the liberal definition of "work" what we do is get paid exorbitant amounts of money (anything over $25,000 a year) to sit in an office and push papers around.

The minimum wage: If you watched their political commercials this last campaign season, you saw sweaty men and women doing positively oppressive hard labor in the spirit of the Gulag for what they want you to believe is mere pennies an hour. We are supposed to believe that these folks work two full time jobs and eight and a half part-time jobs between them -- all for $5.15 an hour -- to put food on the table for their sprouts. As this report from the Heritage Foundation proves, the average household income of minimum wage earners is around $50,000 a year. What this proves is that, in actual reality, teenagers are the only ones making minimum wage or at the very least, the household does not count on the minimum wage earner for its sole income. These are entry-level jobs and there is no reason to pay these kids $7.25 or $8.50 or $10 an hour in the next two years because they don't need it and it prices them out of the market. The free labor market is already setting the prevailing wage for full-time entry-level jobs and unless you and I want to start paying $10 for a "value meal" at Mickey-D's it should be allowed to continue that way. Because nearly every politician who purports to be a “conservative” (including President Bush) has ceded this one to the liberals, you can bet that the price of a value meal will be going up precipitously in the next couple years.

The rising cost of health care (aka the 47 million uninsured): Hang on to your wallet. Because if you think health care costs a lot now wait until it's completely under government control and still costs a lot but that cost comes out of your backside in some kind of health care "contribution" (the liberal weasel word for tax).

Whenever you hear a liberal politician complain about "the rising cost of health care", or the "47 million uninsured" it's because they want to impose an inefficient, expensive government health care bureaucracy on you. If you don't think socialized medicine is inefficient and expensive, you haven't talked to anyone who's lived with it. If you don't mind waiting six months for a hip replacement or heart surgery, perhaps dying in the meantime, socialized medicine is for you. But the fact that folks in Canada and Great Britain and other people from around the world who can afford it come here or pay for their own health care in their own country tells you the private-pay system gives you the most advanced and the highest-quality health care. The last thing we need in this country is socialized medicine but, as she made clear a week or so ago, socialized medicine is exactly what Hillary Clinton wants to give us if she can soften us up between now and the 2008 election. If she's elected president, watch out, because here it comes.

Immigrants: ILLEGAL immigrants. This bears repeating even at the expense of sounding like a broken record: NO ONE OPPOSES LEGAL IMMIGRATION. But what we are talking about here is ILLEGAL immigration; the people who come in an pick lettuce for $5 an hour while taking $10 an hour back out of the country in public and social services, breeding kids who have an automatic entitlement to U.S. citizenship and multiply welfare state dependents like bunnies on fertility drugs. What should we do with the ILLEGAL immigrants that are already here? Ship'em back. Cost too much money, you say? Compare the hundreds of billions it will cost if we continue to expand the welfare state to accommodate them here with the tens of billions it would cost to secure the borders and ship illegals back where they came from and shipping them back sounds like a hell of a bargain. Fat chance of anything substantial happening in this arena though because not only does the president buy into the leftist agenda on this, he also buys their terminology. If anything happens it will end up being amnesty for millions of little welfare recipients living here illegally. Nothing like conferring citizenship on a permanent underclass to drag the whole of society down a few notches.

Mean-spirited or mean-spirited attacks -- what the left labels anyone who happens to truthfully define the left's terms and spell out their agenda as I have done above:

• Pointing out that “re-deploying over the horizon” is actually cutting and running and defames the courageous deeds of all Americans killed and injured in the pursuit of democracy in Iraq is a “mean-spirited” attack on that “war hero” cut and run chicken John Murtha who would prefer to shut down the War on Terror and wait for them to come after us here as opposed to fighting the terrorists abroad. In fact, to listen to liberals, we “mean spirited attackers” who have never been in a war aren’t even qualified to comment on the issues of war and the defense of democracy.

• Being pro-choice means that you are a mean-spirited bastard who wants to deprive women of their "reproductive choices", hand them a coat hanger and herd them into a back alley somewhere which is where they will be forced to rectify the consequences of their irresponsibility should killing inconvenient babies be outlawed.

• Explaining what “the richest among us” really means is a mean-spirited attack on the poorest among us, most of who live off us 365 days a year and get a refund for taxes they never paid in the form of an earned income credit, courtesy of the taxpayers who paid for their food, housing and medical care for the entire year.

• Suggesting that business owners, executives, managers and administrators who get paid a decent salary for all of their hard work and expertise actually work hard for a living is considered a mean-spirited attack on the “working men and women” because, as we all know, the only job business owners, executives, managers and administrators have is the oppress the “working men and women”. Likewise, the suggestion that grocery boys don’t need an increase in their $5.15 hourly wage, is a slam against every “working man and woman” raising their family of four on what their teenage son makes running groceries out to people’s cars.

• Suggesting that socialized medicine is not the answer to “the rising cost of health care” is a mean-spirited attack on Grandma Jones, who right now is forced to eat Alpo in order to be able to afford her valium. If “the rising cost of health care” rises too much more, we may have to give Grandma Jones a box and tell her to go stake out a prime spot under the nearest freeway overpass in which case her intake of valium will double putting her in worse shape that she is now unless the evil drug company gives her a volume discount or – better yet – unless Hillary swoops down and protects Grandma Jones from the rising cost of her valium with socialized medicine. In that case, Grandma Jones might be able to afford a wooden packing crate instead of a cardboard box and upgrade her menu to Pedigree from Alpo.

• Finally, suggesting that people who are in this country illegally and should be sent back and prevented from re-entering this country is a mean spirited attack on “immigrants” who “do the jobs Americans won’t do” (another liberal phrase I didn’t have time to deal with here – so many liberal weasel words, so little time).

If accurately defining the liberal agenda’s weasel words and phrases for what they are makes me a mean-spirited bastard, I’m likely to get a whole lot more mean-spirited and turn into an even biggest bastard over the next two years. But if it will make even one person realize the liberal agenda for what it is or if it even makes a tiny contribution to making certain that two years of the liberal agenda doesn’t turn into six or worse yet, ten, being labeled a mean-spirited bastard by accurately defining the weasel words and phrases of the ruling liberal aristocracy will be well worth it.


Posted by Steve at April 1, 2009 12:00 AM

-->

Comments

Steve:

Sorry to call you out bro, but troops DO redeploy. That's the terminology the military uses when returning from the AOR (Area of Responsibility). When I return from Iraq in February, the process I embark on is called a Redeployment Process.

Your thoughts on Murtha's attempt to cut and run are spot on, though.

Posted by Rich [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 27, 2006 09:09 AM