Word Selection
During political campaigns, especially presidential, word choice becomes very important, interesting and telling. Four years ago, words and phrases like community organizer, lipstick, rogue, muslim, and maverick were tossed around for political gain and damage to opponents.
Or, do "they" think they once owned it and believe it was stolen from them? Whose country is it? Does it belong to all of us, or to just those opposing those who lean left; the liberals; or the Democratic party? And what about the word "our"? I thought America belonged to all her citizens - not just the Tea Party, or the Evangelicals, or Speaker Boehner, or Governor Romney, or Mitch McConnell, or Paul Ryan, etc. We have a two party system, like it or not. One does not have authority, moral or otherwise, over the other. We have three branches of government that supposedly share power and check up on each other. At least that's what I learned in high school civics and the US government course I took in college.
Of course on the other side, we have those who are pro-choice. A much less inflammatory phrase, I think. We all want control over our personal lives, right? Isn't this what pro-choice means? Since I am not female, I haven't a clue what being pregnant involves except that part of the time you become a parent. Having an abortion seems to me one of the most personal decisions any woman can make. If conservatives believe in personal responsibility, why does this not apply to a woman's choice? I know, the shooting-from-the-hip response to this from some on the right - life begins at conception and that it's murder. Well, you know what? Not all people believe that so one bloc of people are attempting to impose their beliefs on others. That, ladies and gentlemen, Americans, is not what America means.
Believe in America
This election cycle the first phrase I noticed I thought both questioned the patriotism of some and insulted the intelligence of others was part of the Romney campaign. On the Governor Romney yard sign it says "Believe in America." What does that mean? I know it's obvious when take literally. What is the campaign, or ultimately Romney, trying to tell people? Believe because we don't now? Believe because Romney will restore America to its once gloried past? Believe because he is a US citizen and Obama is not? Believe because he is more patriotic than me, or millions of others? It is a very strange phrase, at least to me. I know I believe in my country and I don't need anyone to tell me to do so.Take Our Country Back
What year do they think would work? Maybe back to eight years ago under the Bush administration. Or maybe back to the days of Ronald Reagan. Is there a special time in the past when they thought America was better? The problem with going back to a "simpler" time usually means civil rights are diminished.Or, do "they" think they once owned it and believe it was stolen from them? Whose country is it? Does it belong to all of us, or to just those opposing those who lean left; the liberals; or the Democratic party? And what about the word "our"? I thought America belonged to all her citizens - not just the Tea Party, or the Evangelicals, or Speaker Boehner, or Governor Romney, or Mitch McConnell, or Paul Ryan, etc. We have a two party system, like it or not. One does not have authority, moral or otherwise, over the other. We have three branches of government that supposedly share power and check up on each other. At least that's what I learned in high school civics and the US government course I took in college.
Forward
It's usually a positive word. In the Obama campaign, it seems to mean not going back. The horrible recession can be blamed on a few things definitively: the 9/11 terrorist attacks, waging two wars, the housing bubble bursting, and wall street greed. The opinion side some people also blame the Bush tax cuts and Bush's drug prescription program. So, when Obama talks about going forward I believe they mean to move away from the reasons for the recession. One war has officially ended and one is scheduled to end. Regulations have been passed to prevent (hopefully of course) another housing bubble. And, new regulations have been put in place for Wall Street, but greed cannot be cured.Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice
The term "pro-life" was coined back in the 70's after the Roe v. Wade ruling from the Supreme Court. When taken straight forward it's not problematic. When I break it down though it makes me think anyone who is pro-choice must be against life. Now that's just insulting and silly. Republicans have ordered just as many bombs dropped, if not more recently, as Democrats. How can that be construed as pro-life? It does sound better on both sides of the issue when you leave out the word abortion. But, being pro-life makes me think there are those that are anti-life, or the pro-lifers think so anyway. It is treated like an either/or proposition. It is never a simple situation.Of course on the other side, we have those who are pro-choice. A much less inflammatory phrase, I think. We all want control over our personal lives, right? Isn't this what pro-choice means? Since I am not female, I haven't a clue what being pregnant involves except that part of the time you become a parent. Having an abortion seems to me one of the most personal decisions any woman can make. If conservatives believe in personal responsibility, why does this not apply to a woman's choice? I know, the shooting-from-the-hip response to this from some on the right - life begins at conception and that it's murder. Well, you know what? Not all people believe that so one bloc of people are attempting to impose their beliefs on others. That, ladies and gentlemen, Americans, is not what America means.
Comments
Post a Comment