Before I get started, a few disclaimers: 1) I'm NOT implying that Keith Olbermann is saying don't support them; 2) I am a veteran that served in the Air Force for 8+ years; and 3) If you've never heard of FRANK LUNTZ, please do some homework.
I first heard of him a few weeks ago on Bill Maher's show. In a nutshell, he is the propaganda-wordsmith for Mr. Bush and his crew. It was his great idea to change the ESTATE TAX to the DEATH TAX, SCHOOL VOUCHERS to OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIPS, and DRILLING FOR OIL ON A WILDLIFE PRESERVE to RESPONSIBLE ENERGY EXPLORATION...to name a few.
This brings me to the point of words and their meanings. We have to be VERY CAREFUL not to take "answers" to our questions at face value. Actual definitions and intentions of words and phrases are what need to be taken into consideration. We all know politicians LIE to some extent, either through wordplay or straight out. As a result, we need to take the initiative to UNDERSTAND what the true meanings are of what we're being told.
After taking in as much of the media as I could stand, I came to the conclusion that the Dems backed down because of the accusation that they were NOT supporting the troops. Politically, I understand this. How is someone going to get elected President (2008) if they don't support the troops (in theory). I can't believe Mr. Bush pulled this off once again.
We need to forget about what "SUPPORT THE TROOPS" used to mean. After all, we are living in a different world in different times. By continuing to blindly support the cause of this administration, we are WITH THEM. And we need to be AGAINST THEM! I could go on forever with this topic, but I won't...
How about this?
Do you think it would be that difficult for the Dems to start gathering veterans and their families in support of ending the war? If they do that, it would be CLOSE to impossible for the Republican wordsmiths to say the Dems are not supporting the troops. Then, we could get by this hurdle and get to the REAL ISSUES...
FUCK FEAR!
No comments:
Post a Comment