Sarah Palin Speaks a Language That Few Understand – of Meaning and Principle

Few modern politicians can elicit the reaction that Sarah Palin usually gets. To her fans and supporters, she’s a plain spoken conservative with common-sense ideas for America. To her detractors, she’s a shrill, not-too-bright snowbilly hick who’s full of hatred.

How does one account for such wild swings in opinion?

The answer is at once simple and complex; she speaks a foreign language.

Her grassroots appeal is why her supporters are her supporters. She rose through the political ranks from the local arena, through a mayorship, on to governor of Alaska, and onto the national stage as a vice-presidential candidate. Her wisdom and political acumen is borne of experience.

Her detractors cite her lack of a political pedigree. She doesn’t come from a prominent political family and she wasn’t educated at Yale, Harvard, or Princeton. She’s not aware of the ins and outs (the nuances, if you will) of politics. They cite her folksy demeanor, which they, in their infinite wisdom, interpret as something less than elite, common, and she is therefore unfit for public office. In their own highly esteemed opinion, she’s not one of them.

Good.

I’ve wondered why all the hate towards someone I identify with? It’s been my experience that experience is the best teacher of all. Sarah Palin has experience, but she also has something that has been absent in our political process for quite some time, and is poised to make a grand comeback: principles and meaning.

This is a subtle thing, this meaning. It’s been removed from our national dialogue through the introduction of political correctness. Note again, if you will, something I pointed out the other day. Words that formerly had meaning have been replaced with something far less than precise. The easily understood description of a garbageman has been replaced with the term “sanitation worker.” This is only one example, there are quite a few more.

When this trend began, it’s supporters insisted on the new usage over the old one. I’ve seen and heard speakers corrected mid-sentence for not using the new, improved language of politi-speak. I always felt like asking those people, “Why do you insist that I use the word “spokesperson” instead of “spokesman”? Do you not know what I mean? I do include men and women who speak on behalf of a group. Why can’t you understand that?” But that’s not me on TV.

It seems that the plain old traditional method of communication where the meaning of a word was plainly understood by all is falling into disfavor, primarily among those who think themselves to be superior to the rest of us. It’s a conceit, a shibboleth, to indicate that they belong to a certain class of Americans who are oh-so-much more enlightened than us knuckle-dragging bitter-clingers.

Look around you and ask yourself just how good of a job these political elites are doing. There’s not much to recommend, is there?

If I may, I’d like to draw another analogy to the engineering world. If I have an idea for a product, I have an overall sense of what that I want that product to do. That’s called the “design intent” and it functions as an umbrella of sorts over the project. When questions about a specific aspect of the product arise, they take the form of “What is the intent of the design?” The answer to that question determines a lot.

It’s an all-encompassing concept that guides the development for said product. Sometimes it’s easily recognized and documented, at other times it’s less clear, but it’s always there. This could also be called the guiding principle of the design.

So, what we have here is a “first principle” or the basis of the intent of the design; it serves as the foundation of the product, regardless of the steps or methods of development.

Now, let’s move that idea of an overarching principle and apply it to Sarah Palin. Her speeches tend to be long on ideology and somewhat short on specifics, something her detractors are quick to point out. But there’s a reason for that: she is speaking of the overall concepts that should guide our country, but are missing in today’s political arena of ideas.

Take ObamaCare (please!). It seems the progressives, in their zeal to implement one of their most cherished big-government programs, universal health care for all, ignored the most important design principle of all: the never bothered to ask if what they were trying to do was permitted by our Constitution.

Had we the proper people acting in our stead in Washington, this would’ve been the first question that was asked before starting on that legislative crusade. Clearly it wasn’t, which is why 26 states have filed suit against it and why it’s currently being argued in the 11th Circuit Court in Atlanta today. They just went ahead and did it, making the rules up as they went along.



Back to Sarah, when she speaks, she speaks of the lost values of individualism, personal responsibility and freedom, and of the limited role of government that was the original intent of our Founders. These are the principles enshrined in our constitution and the ones that should be the intent of every law that is written. You and I know, however, this is far from what’s happening in Washington today.

And the number of people who can’t understand her is deeply concerning. They seem oblivious to meaning, and look at you funny when you say something that they should intuitively understand, yet don’t.

I’m noticing more and more of these curious creatures as time goes by. They tend to repeat slogans and buzzwords, glibly free of any kind of relevance to reality. When presented with the facts that disprove their position, their emotions take over instead of their intellect. Rational argument is replaced with criticism and name-calling.

Just like third grade.

It’s not that Sarah Palin is dumb, not by any means. As we’ve seen in the past few days of the Anthony Weiner scandal, we have the ability to elect some stupid, dishonest people without principles into positions of power.

The people who still support Weiner after the truth was known about his virtual peccadillos will never understand Sarah Palin.

And they vote.

Sleep well tonight.

Poets, Priests, and Politicians, Part II – Those Word Thingys

I like to observe things. Life, people, pretty women (especially BackwardsGirl), squirrels, lizards, hot cars, motorcycles, and bright, shiny objects. I have to stay away from those last ones, though, they’re really pretty.

Really, really, pretty.

Oh, I left out politics and the practitioners of that dark art. There is a wide chasm between reality and what goes on inside the head of the typical politician. The more leftward they lean, the greater the chasm.

Of particular note is the way they use language to disguise their intentions. New York Senator Chuck Schumer showed us how this works when he inadvertently instructed his party cohorts to describe any attempts by Republicans to cut the budget as “extreme.” Inadvertently, since he didn’t think anyone else was listening besides his party-mates.

“I always use the word extreme,” Schumer told Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Barbara Boxer of California, Benjamin Cardin and Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, according to New York Times reporter Jennifer Steinhauer, who was on the call without Schumer knowing it. “That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.”

It’s too bad they didn’t instruct him to just tell the truth, or to get to work cutting this bloated beast of a deficit down to a manageable size so our grandkids can have a future. He seems to follow marching orders well; he just doesn’t take them from the people he’s supposed to, namely his constituents.

But I digress.

That example was pretty blatant, but it proves that there are some folks in Washington who are willing to twist and distort the English language so they can increase their power and control over us. That’s standard operating procedure and it’s done on a regular basis by those on the left.

That twisting and distortion can also be rather subtle. In fact, it works better when it’s done that way.

I had a conversation a few years back with a friend when I noted that machinists weren’t held in very high regard by the general public anymore. I said it was because the public never heard the word “machinist” without also hearing the words “union” and “strike.” Since that phrase came out of me without thinking about it, a little light bulb went on.

That’s how it’s done.

It doesn’t need to be an outright lie to be effective. A grand lie works as well as a small one. There are subtle variations that can be just as effective.

So, why am I telling you this? You may already know how it’s done. You may also not know. If so, then just consider this an affirmation. If not, or if you know someone who seems susceptible to suggestion, you can help them by pointing this out.

You see, there’s a propensity for us humans to automatically accept any information as true. This binary acceptance of anything is also our undoing. Skepticism is a very healthy thing to have in your mental toolkit these days, especially when it comes to politics. That old adage, “Don’t believe anything you read and only half of what you hear” is a good yardstick. That might be backwards, but hey, it’s what I do.

Still, one must develop an ability to decode any statement coming from a politician. Plain language isn’t their strong point, and many statements can mean something entirely different than at first blush.

Take this for example. I’ve linked to it before, but it’s good and bears repeating: Health Care Words to Use and Avoid.

Use the term “quality, affordable health care” instead of “universal health care.”

Say "giving people control or peace of mind” instead of “public health care for all.”

Here’s my favorite: use “guaranteed” instead of “required.”

Or, “bovine-based, organic growth enhancer” instead of “bullshit.”

But also be on the lookout for those descriptors used together such as “extreme right-wing.” After a while, you could drop the word “extreme” and just use the word “right-wing” and the word “extreme” becomes implied. Repetition is the key. It works. Many times, too well. How many lefties have you talked to who could repeat, verbatim, certain talking points, but when countered with facts, fall apart into a blithering heap of name-calling and invectives?

There’s a verbal war going on out there.

Forewarned is forearmed.

Poets, Priests and Politicians Have These to Thank...

Our friends over at Founding Bloggers have a great article that outlines the care and thought that is put into manipulating the language used to convince you that a government takeover of our health care system is a good idea.

When you're allergic to the truth, you have to resort to manipulation.