In the
battle to garner favorable public opinion, the side
with the best catch-phrase nearly always wins. Facts
and figures may solidify a previously chosen
position, but they rarely sway the low information
voter. Leftists are experts at designer terminology;
conservatives not so much. Like the strongest of
gladiators, we confidently march onto the
battlefield knowing we wield the two-edged sword of
the truth. Instantly, the collectivists impale us
with phrases like “Clean and Green”, “Affordable
Care Act”, and “War on Women.” For conservatives to
ever be competitive, we must learn to re-name
arguments to stack the odds in our favor. Here are
two examples.
“Physician assisted suicide” and “death with
dignity” sounds so loving and meaningful only the
cruelest public servant could oppose it. I did in
Montana’s 2013 legislative session and still do.
Proponents offered tear-jerking stories of loved
ones teetering on the threshold of death for days,
weeks, or months. The “compassionate choice” was to
bump the patient into the abyss. Interestingly and
obviously, no patient who has chosen physician
assisted suicide has ever testified on the issue.
Now watch what happens when we leave the procedure
intact, but change the catch-phrase to “government
assisted suicide”; a term more fitting to where
America is heading and here is why.
Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the chief architects of
Obamacare, wrote in The Atlantic, “…this manic
desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided
and potentially destructive. For many reasons, 75 is
a pretty good age to aim to stop.” Mr. Emanuel’s
op-ed displayed a chart showing the last significant
contribution a person makes to society is at age 65,
with the following years representing a drain on the
community’s resources. Re-read that sentence and let
it soak in because it should scare you. Once
government is your only healthcare choice, treatment
will be based not on what is best for you or your
family, but what is best for the good of the whole.
Government assisted suicide is a temporary stop on
our way to forced euthanasia of utopia’s
non-producers be they aged, or mentally or
physically disabled. Shifting wasted Medicare and
Medicaid funds to social programs secures power for
the ruling class. Is this what the AARP had in mind
when they endorsed Obamacare? Now to my last
example.
The “non-discrimination ordinance”, or NDO, is a
great political slogan because to oppose it
automatically positions one as defending
discrimination. When this ordinance appears before
political bodies few public servants have the
foresight to recognize an NDO purposely
discriminates against a very specific group of
people. When fully implemented, the ruling class
will use the full force and power of government to
silence those who disagree with them. Recently, the
city of Houston used their non-discrimination
ordinance to demand a group of pastors surrender any
sermons addressing homosexuality or gender identity
to government authorities. Those who refused could
be charged with contempt of court. Unless you thrive
on ignorance, you must realize letting government
approve or reject the specific teachings of the
church is a blatant violation of the First
Amendment. If you still do not understand the
problem, let’s change the name of the NDO to the
more descriptive catch-phrase, the “Christian
Censorship Act.” Now is it clear?
|