Framing those liberals
So, I decided, since it's so quiet out here, that it's time to say something about the way our discussions have been going over the last, oh I dunno, maybe five years.
It wasn't so long ago that the word 'liberal' meant someone who was open-minded, unprejudiced, able to listen to the other side of an argument without getting all hot and bothered, basically your laid-back hippy.
These days, the word 'liberal' has been changed to mean someone who wants to spend our taxes on immigrants on welfare, promote the gay lifestyle in our schools and boy scout meetings, and take all our guns away so the government could win the fight over who controls the oil prices. Oh yeah, the liberal also wants to stay on unemployment forever and just let those union workers support the rest of the Country.
Now, maybe you disagree with my definitions. My point is that since 90% of our media is owned by 6 major corporations, there has been a brain-washing campaign instituted by them to denigrate the meaning of the word liberal. It is done by adding a few adjectives whenever the word liberal is used in a sentence. Limo-liberals, gay-marriage-liberals, tax-spending-liberals... These added adjectives have made being a liberal a crime against society. Read "Don't Think of an Elephant" by George Lakoff. I tried watching the movie "Deflating the Elephant" which is also by him. He has some very good ideas and explanations in the movie. But, it's like sitting in a classroom listening to a very boring lecture. He tried to jazz it up by having Sean Penn jump in occasionally to say a few words on the subject. But, I'm afraid that his face is just not enough to put on the screen while he tells of the right wing conspiracy to win back the support of the lower and middle classes.
The book (one of many he's written) is a lot easier to take. This guy is a Berkeley professor and has clear, documented proof that the media has been brain washing us in order to FRAME the meaning of words to suit their purposes.
The main purpose is to put the welfare of the 1% (who own these corporations) above the Government and above the rest of the population. Deregulate the corporation, remove taxation from the corporation and let the people deal with the economy after we all die.
I can go on. I'll wait for some response before I say any more.
Have you heard of framing? Is this not happening? I think the liberals have fallen asleep at the wheel and been driven over by the framing campaign to shift the meaning of many words in our vocabulary.
Any thoughts?
It wasn't so long ago that the word 'liberal' meant someone who was open-minded, unprejudiced, able to listen to the other side of an argument without getting all hot and bothered, basically your laid-back hippy.
These days, the word 'liberal' has been changed to mean someone who wants to spend our taxes on immigrants on welfare, promote the gay lifestyle in our schools and boy scout meetings, and take all our guns away so the government could win the fight over who controls the oil prices. Oh yeah, the liberal also wants to stay on unemployment forever and just let those union workers support the rest of the Country.
Now, maybe you disagree with my definitions. My point is that since 90% of our media is owned by 6 major corporations, there has been a brain-washing campaign instituted by them to denigrate the meaning of the word liberal. It is done by adding a few adjectives whenever the word liberal is used in a sentence. Limo-liberals, gay-marriage-liberals, tax-spending-liberals... These added adjectives have made being a liberal a crime against society. Read "Don't Think of an Elephant" by George Lakoff. I tried watching the movie "Deflating the Elephant" which is also by him. He has some very good ideas and explanations in the movie. But, it's like sitting in a classroom listening to a very boring lecture. He tried to jazz it up by having Sean Penn jump in occasionally to say a few words on the subject. But, I'm afraid that his face is just not enough to put on the screen while he tells of the right wing conspiracy to win back the support of the lower and middle classes.
The book (one of many he's written) is a lot easier to take. This guy is a Berkeley professor and has clear, documented proof that the media has been brain washing us in order to FRAME the meaning of words to suit their purposes.
The main purpose is to put the welfare of the 1% (who own these corporations) above the Government and above the rest of the population. Deregulate the corporation, remove taxation from the corporation and let the people deal with the economy after we all die.
I can go on. I'll wait for some response before I say any more.
Have you heard of framing? Is this not happening? I think the liberals have fallen asleep at the wheel and been driven over by the framing campaign to shift the meaning of many words in our vocabulary.
Any thoughts?
Comments
In fairness, it's done by the "liberal media" as well, just watch MSNBC for a bit and they do the same thing towards "conservatives" (another inaccurate term).
All the liberals can do. once they've realized that it has happened, is to fight back in kind.
I think the liberals have been a bit asleep.
The framing is easy to do. Effective brain washing takes years of time.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/investor/2011/09/15/whats-china-buying-in-the-u-s/2/
http://www.tradereform.org/2012/05/u-s-wary-of-chinas-buying-spree/
We treat any corporation as an individual because of Reagan and Bush deregulation. This might bite us in the ass if we just allow any corporation (or government) to invest in our infrastructure without any regulation. The free market brings in tax-free or low taxed external businesses into our world. Maybe reinstating the Eisenhower 90% tax would limit these guys from getting into our pants.
The very rich can buy into whatever they feel is a good investment.
If we reduce our taxes and allow unregulated businesses to do the work, we reduce our own investment in our own roads, bridges, power generation systems, etc.
The corporations have established a coup de etat of our government by framing 'taxes' as an affliction and using 'tax relief' for the 1% as a battle cry for the right wing.
How does this affect the US population? Will it ever be recognised as happening?
Have you noticed that Cruz won in Republican Texas with the help of the Tea Party and will probably be their next Republican Senator?
The people have gotten sick of the status quo and are voting in Tea Party candidates. Do you think this will improve our government?
I'm glad that you are happy with the corporations being treated as individuals instead of a large group of individuals that push their power trip on the citizens. It's a bit hard to imagine the tobacco industry as one individual.
I'm sure your interpretation of how the free market will get the economy back into shape. If we have less taxes, we will just have to put up with more potholes in the roads and more criminals in the streets. We don't need to invest or maintain in our infrastructure. Let the free market take care of those things.
So, let's compromise. Lower taxes are OK with me if we can find things to agree to cut. Let's cut military spending, Immigration control, and such. Let's sell the buildings the government owns and get rid of the staffers we don't need. Smaller government is fine with me. We might have a few unemployed people out there. But, since you say there a lots of jobs out there, they'll find them. Oh yeah, weren't you looking for a job to buy that car? How's it going with that?
How about letting everyone have all the guns they want, but limit the sale of bullets. Today, anyone can buy all the bullets they want at any hardware store. If we had guns in our safe but had to write down the serial number of every bullet, it would limit the free-for-all shooting every week-end out here in the woods. The dog could rest from the sounds of shooting every week-end - from morning to night.
How many people would do the measuring of powder, sticking the shell into the casing, and all the hoopla involved in producing bullets that don't include lots of duds? The ones that don't pay attention to the instructions of how to make bullets might blow themselves up. I guess it's a small price to pay for the freedom of having all those guns.
I'm watching the 7th season of West Wing. There was on episode that had a debate between the Republican and the Democratic nominee for President. One can see the sense on both sides if one accepts either ideological premise. The rest of the arguments on both sides do make sense. I understood a lot about why Republicans believe the things they do. They even discussed the framing stuff that's on another thread. This was filmed in 2005. It shows how we got to the economic place we are today.
It's OK out here during the week. But, on the weekends, there are lots of the aforementioned yahoos out here. They set empty beer cans and shoot at them until they either run out of bullets or just get bored. Maybe they run out of beer. But that's easy to get. Plenty of booze in town. If it were harder to buy ammo, it would limit the fun these guys have. They might go rape some women or knock off the 7/11 with their newly found power - the gun - or they might just go home and watch TV.
It also bothers me that they set up targets without worry about where the bullets travel after going thru the beer cans. It just strikes me as playing with fire. Yeah, we have the freedom to light campfires in the woods. We also have the freedom to start forest fires. It can all get out of hand when the yahoo (who knows it all) gets his hands on C4, dynamite, or just that ubiquitous handgun. Then there are the assault rifles, the uzis, etc. How does one justify those items for keeping his family safe?
I don't agree with your 99.9% number. I see many of these guys on the weekends. They already can't drive by the time they get here. They are looking for some fun stuff to shoot. Does this make you feel that we are safer?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/excessive-drinking-cost-wade-michael-page-military-career-civilian-job/2012/08/07/274ccc7a-e095-11e1-a421-8bf0f0e5aa11_story.html
I guess we should blame the media for making us afraid of those people who have those guns.
The drunk shooters come out and set up a target shooting, drinking campsite for a day or two. If no one shows up to chase them away, they know they can come back the next weekend. No one calls the cops on anyone out here. We just let them have their fun and go away. If the police were involved, they would be out here with 3 SUVs and a bunch of cops looking for action.
If bullets had a serial number, they could have a history of who bought it from the store. Sure, the same goes for guns. The serial numbers are often filed off to obscure where it came from or who used it for what in the past. I just see a gun as a razor blade in your wallet that can be used for protection in certain situations, but, more often, will cut your finger when pulling out the credit card.
I also don't think that you really plan to get a gun and start carrying it around for protection. I think you are arguing about what the Constitution was written about. It was about muskets at that time. I think it was a reality to have a gun to protect the family from the bear or mountain lion - maybe a robber, too. The wild west had a lot of shootings. I don't think the real west was quite such a country of Jesse James and Billy the Kid. The media was selling stories way back then, too.
If 45% of the population has guns, it includes all the cops, criminals, and security guards. I wonder if the military vets are included with their M-1s from the last war? Do they carry that around in the truck? So these numbers leave me wondering about the true situation. I never see anyone with a gun in town or in the woods. OK, it's different during deer season for the few weeks.
The concealed weapon guy is already a bit of a nut job in my book. He must know something I don't know if he feels that he needs to keep it around when it never even occurs to me.
But, it is a free country. Porn is legal, prostitution is legal in Nevada, assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, and execution of a mentally retarded fellow is legal in Texas. I'm gonna stay out of the States that make me uncomfortable. Florida with their gun rules has made the list. I hope they feel safer out there. I wonder if you really do, too?
If you go into tough neighborhoods a lot of the time, or do law enforcement or some such activity, I could see the protection aspect coming into play. I guess if you are really paranoid, the protection might be necessary all the time. I just don't agree with the basic premise that because of so much violent crime out there, one needs to be ready. Many violent crimes don't include a gun. I think those millions of violent crimes are mostly drunk fist fights.
Fistfights, food fights, family ruckus about money, did you make your bed today? kind of fights all could lead to violence. Would a gun stop the violence? Pulling it would heighten the tension and the stakes. It could stop it. It might require the gunless one to throw something later when your back is turned. It just depends on the situation. I prefer to leave the machete or baseball bat at home, too.
You are right that the black market bullets would become readily available. It would take a long time to get the signature bullets to replace the ones out there now. Maybe there could be some other way of labeling each pile of bullets.
I think it would be better to just cut production of bullets. Less would be shot if they cost more. I think it would appeal to the gun makers to raise the price of all of their toys. They would get richer. I guess killing is fun (if you're on the firing end.)
Just because they have a law in Vermont that lets 16 yearolds carry concealed guns doesn't mean that that's the reason the crime rate is lower than out here. The people in the State might have laws allowing them to do lots of things. It doesn't decide what will happen. If there are guns everywhere, it's much more likely that some idiot will get his hands on it and do something stupid. If they are hard to find, the criminals will have to work a bit harder to get one.
This Country is VERY violent. It comes from football games, getting higher school grades, two guys wanting the same babe, the need for food, the need for oil to keep us driving, the TV shows and movies, and all of that. We are the Country with the most guns, too. Do you see any connection at all?