Posted on 12/11/2012 6:29:57 AM PST by Kaslin
For months, pundits and politicians have been saying that Americans have a math problem. They have a point, for Mr. Obama routinely champions the idea that running annual deficits in excess of $1 trillion dollars can be continued, simply by requiring Americans to pay $200 billion in taxes more each year. Anyone with a 3rd grade grasp of math has long ago come to the conclusion that even if Mr. Obama gets his way, huge annual deficits will remain, and the nation cannot sustain the current level of profligate spending indefinitely. Somehow, contrary to all known mathematics principles, and contrary to all common sense, in the mind of our president, the math works.
Now, even our language is under assault. Americans are no longer arguing about increasingly misleading and dodgy ways to represent the budget numbers, but are now battling over the meaning of the words being used by both sides in these arguments.
Consider Mr. Obama’s primary contention that the millionaires and billionaires (defined, without any sense of irony, as those making $250,000 a year) need to pay “just a little bit more” in taxes. The president contends that raising taxes to 39% on the top 2% will generate $1.6 trillion dollars over 10 years with no adverse effects to job growth.
• Barack Obama, has said "We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more."
• Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, has said: "people making all this money have to contribute a little bit more,"
• Dick Durbin, Senate Majority Whip, has said; "let the tax rates go up to 39 percent", that's it's okay for the wealthy to pay "just a bit more".
• According to Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), "At a time when middle class families continue to struggle, it’s only fair to call on the wealthiest Americans to pay just a bit more toward their fair share,” Murray said after the vote".
• Peter Orszag (former head of OMB) claims: calling for the wealthy to pay "just a bit more" in order to achieve needed compromise on taxes and debt, is a reasonable and moderate approach.
However, in the Democrat's lexicon, what constitutes "just a bit more" changes dramatically when referring to calls for cuts of $400 billion in entitlement reform. Suddenly, much smaller calls for cuts of $400 billion are defined as imprudent "hacking away", "a gusher" and "hemorrhaging.", Yet, the president's plan to raise $1.6 trillion (or about 4 times that amount) in new taxes are described as “just a little bit.”
Remember the Paul Ryan Budget that called for $1.4 trillion in cuts to Medicaid? That plan was quickly called a "draconian", effort to punish the poor and elderly. If $1.6 trillion is defined by Mr. Obama as “just a little bit”, how then can a smaller number be defined as a draconian slash designed to punish? But, all of this, Mr. Obama tells us, is in the pursuit of a “balanced approach”.
Words do matter, and according to Socrates' Law of Identity, A=A. Or, as John Stuart Mill explains: "Whatever is true in one form of words, is true in every other form of words, which conveys the same meaning". So, if 1.6 trillion dollars is "gouging" and "draconian" when talking about entitlement spending cuts, then $1.6 trillion dollars is "gouging" and "draconian" when talking about tax increases.
We seem to have reached a sad impasse: even before members of Congress can agree on a course of action to avert the fiscal cliff, they need to agree on what words they use.
During the last election, Democrats proved their ability to inflame and to misdirect attention away from the president's failed policies, while obfuscating the very real financial crisis our country is facing. Inciting class warfare and racial tensions with the careful use of loaded words has become a Democrat stock in trade whenever there are difficult policy decisions to be made. The question is: how can Republicans negotiate with Democrats when the two parties clearly speak different languages?
Since when have liberals ever let little things like facts interfere with their utopian fantasies?
I urge all to read “The Language of the 3rd reich” by Viktor Klemperer. In the book he details how the nazis manipulated the language as a means of manipulating society.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Language-Third-Reich-Imprerii/dp/0826457770
“...We can make another trillion or trillion-two...”
Casually and smugly throwing around the concept of ‘trillions’ of dollars like this is proof positive (as if we need it) that “O” has NO understanding of economics AT ALL!
Our ‘President’ is a moron!
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master---that's all."
“Democrats’ Assault on Language”
Assault on Language? How about Pro-Choice = Pro-Abortion. This change to the language has changed America.
Here is the problem with the “Fiscal Cliff” and “Millionaires and Billionaire paying(a bit more)”
For 8 years Democrats and their attack dogs in the media called it the “BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH”. If that is the case, why are the middle class and lower class affected by the BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH expiring? They ran on it in 2006 and took Congress and the Senate, as well as the White House.
Isn’t it time someone on the right opens their mouth and tell America what really happened? Not even Rush or Hannity has addressed this, which is the most obvious case of deceit to the American people. This is so bad it should be punishable by impeachment of Reid, Pelosi and Obama for purposely lying to the American people while the media should lose its licenses for spreading this falsehood.
But noooooooooooooo.... The RINOS and the Right Wing entertainment industry is keeping silent.
Satan was twisting words and the meaning thereof since he first was tempting humans.
The left is following their ideological father to a ‘t’.
John 8:42.
You said it
If we can't agree to the meaning of commonly known, and defined words, we are in deep kimchee.
5.56mm
John 8:42-47
New International Version (NIV)
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”
You guys don't give Barky enough credit for smarts. He knows exactly what he is doing, how to do it and when to do it.
He is very intelligently malevolent.
The personification of EVIL.
With malice of fore thought.
Father God forgive us our sins, we pray for forgiveness of sins and protection from evil, we thank Thee for our awesome blessings and favor in America. Help us to not be deceived, lead us in the way we are to walk. We love Thee LORD. in Jesus name, amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.