Defining the argument

One of the unfortunate consequences of being a decent person is that it makes one reluctant to tell lies and half-truths. Not so with individuals whose beliefs are such that the end justifies the means. It leads to the creation of creepy Orwellian terminology to advance a point of view and it usually originates from the Left.

Take the term “reproductive health.” It’s a perfectly benign term that conjures images of caring healthcare professionals concerned over a woman’s ability to reproduce. Of course, we all know that the term is a euphemism for abortion, a procedure that is anti-reproductive and often has harmful effects on the health of the person receiving one. Studies have shown that women who have had abortions are less likely to be able to have children subsequent to abortions than women who have never aborted. But this column isn’t about abortion. It’s about how the Left uses language to deceive ignorant people into adopting policies that if they understood, they would oppose.

---

Take the term “social justice.” We all know that it’s a euphemism for taking money away from individuals who produce wealth through hard work and give it to individuals who would prefer to stay home and watch Oprah. But, hey, the real definition of “social justice” is that those who put in efforts should reap rewards and those who do not should not. End of story. The recent controversy surrounding Chick-fil-A and how its founder’s beliefs were not reflective of “Chicago values” or “Boston values” or “San Francisco values” is yet another example of using language or euphemisms to attempt to intimidate and disenfranchise those with opposing views. Chicago should consider itself lucky to have a company such as Chick-fil-A set up shop in its squalid streets, given that the city is a cesspool of corruption, of extreme violence and of unbridled hatred. Ditto for Boston, a city that has its own wretched history, which if reflective of its “values” is an utter embarrassment. The truth is the values espoused by the mayors of those cities are euphemisms that thinly disguise hatred for Christians. As proof one needs merely look at the tolerance these same mayors show toward individuals who truly are hateful, such as Louis Farrakhan, who hates both gays and Jews and the many Islamic imams who advocate similar views with even greater extremity. Another term that’s been making the rounds for years is “racist” and it’s generally hurled at individuals with whom the Left disagrees. Hence Mitt Romney is a “racist” because he’s running against The Anointed One and all Republicans are “racists” because they happen to have different ideas about how welfare should work. But in point of fact, it was the Democratic Party that is infested with racists. Individuals like J. William Fullbright, a Southern Democrat Senator and staunch segregationist and Senator Robert Byrd of Virginia who was President Pro Tempore of the Senate until 2010, and oh, yes, also has the title of “Kleagle” and “Exalted Cyclops” for the Ku Klux Klan on his resume. Modern Democrats want to continue to sell blacks short by expecting less of them than they expect of whites. What’s wrong with true equality? What’s more many individuals are likely unaware of the fact that the author of the Emancipation Proclamation, Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and Congressional Democrats staunchly opposed civil rights legislation right into the 1970s. But that’s no reason to refrain from accusing Republicans of racism because it plays well in the New York Times or Washington Post. Political debate is no longer about policy or even politics, as one side has invented handy shorthand that decries ideas in favor of accusatory rhetoric. Are you suffering from a phobia? How about claustrophobia? Or agoraphobia? No? Well if you’re concerned about Muslim terrorists, then you suffer from Islamophopia, a condition that certifies you for internment into a reeducation facility somewhere in the Arctic, or better yet to be hounded out of your community by the liberal stalwarts guarding Right Thinking. As conservatives, we need to counter this onslaught against truth through similar tactics, because the war of ideas is one that’s heavily weighted with words. Instead of calling it Obamacare, which connotes that somehow The One will care for you, we need to call it what it is designed to be: a government health monopoly, and never mind the care. We are aware that there is a movement afoot to discredit faith in our society, not all faith, mind you. Just the Christian faith. Again, instead of allowing the Rahm Emanuels of this world to talk about Chicago values, we need to vigorously point out the true motive behind that sentiment—hate against Christians. The current political campaign is demonstrating what happens when the Left sets the terms of the debate. There should be no way that Obama’s numbers are as high as they are right now, given his poor performance in office. Yet by appealing to class envy and other base emotions, Obama is managing to keep his head above water. If we want to win, then we must set the terms of the debate. Our current course is a recipe for defeat and the stakes are too high to allow defeat.