HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » calimary » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 1183 Next »

calimary

Profile Information

Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 42,821

Journal Archives

Link is here:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/scalpers-losing-money-tickets-trump-inauguration-article-1.2947620?utm_content=buffere0167&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=NYDailyNewsTw

But the Raw Story item about the betting on IMPEACHMENT is sweet!

Something particularly gratifying to see in the article's title.

"GOPer Who Vowed To Stand up To Trump Flees Constituents At Community Event"

The money word here is "Flees." You read the body of the story and the action described doesn't quite lead to "he flees the constituents." He did exit stage right before the event was over. Too bad it wasn't 36 minutes prematurely rather than a mere six minutes.

Nevertheless, using a vivid verb - that lends more meaning, suggests or infers more meaning, can really steer someone's thinking. Saying somebody left six minutes early, and saying somebody was fleeing constituents asking too many questions - they both may be true. But the "somebody was fleeing..." definitely paints a clearer pictures. Points you in a deliberate direction. Invites you to think of it in a more derogatory and unflattering way than merely to say "somebody left six minutes early." You can really manipulate perception that way.

I used to notice, for example, that if you said "President So-n-so says blah-blah-blah...", that has subtly but decisively different meaning than to say "President So-n-so claims blah-blah-blah..." The word choice of "claims" puts a whole different tinge on things. One way of stating something can be harmless and straightforward. Another way can be subliminal and manipulative - directing your thinking and the impressions made on you in a very calculated way. Depending on strategic word choices. You can cast doubt by saying "President So-n-so claims...", lending just a flicker of a negative light, whereas "President So-n-so says... " sounds a lot more declarative, more definitive, with far less doubt. You can manage perception that way. Perception management. It's KEY. And that's why our Dems HAVE TO-HAVE TO-HAVE TO get the messaging right, stronger, clearer, more clever (so it sticks in the mind), and more powerful.

Word choices are sooooooooooo key. I swear, sometimes it feels speaking in code. Frank Luntz understands this. kkkarl rove understands this. I think that bastard Steve Bannon and his pals understand this. Alex Jones understands this. Roger Ailes understands this. Brent Bozell understands this. Ralph Reed understands this. Drudge and limbaugh do, too, and Andrew Breitbart did. A whole bunch of those manipulative, calculating, sneaky-ass bastards on that side of the aisle understand this. Or they've learned it through the careful tactical tutelage of some CON think tank. Sure wish WE had that.

I am very encouraged that the Indivisible Guide is out. It's a VERY good beginning.

https://www.indivisibleguide.com/

Unfortunately, the bad guys have had the benefit of decades of head start, though. Ever since the Powell Memo back in the early 70s, a blueprint for conservatives and business and the US Chamber of Commerce - on how to thwart the anti-establishment "60s" mindset that let the heathens and "dirty hippies" in and allowed them to overrun the national psyche. Took 'em decades, but they overran the burgeoning left and took over - as we now see manifested across the country, in most of the power positions locally, statewide, regionally, and nationally.

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/

But knowledge is power. I'm gratified as all-get-out that President Obama and former Attorney General Holder have made this a top priority, once our president leaves office. And not a moment too soon. We HAVE TO be on our toes.

Powerful.

And thought-provoking. They come up with some great ones.

"Build that wall!" Around THEM.

Let them start feeling those walls closing in on them. Let them feel the sweat under their collar and abject FEAR at the thought of the upcoming midterms.

May they spend every morning of this next Congressional term - reaching for the Maalox bottle on their nightstand, immediately upon awakening. I wish them LOTS and LOTS of Tums for the tummy. And Alka Seltzer. And Pepto Bismol. And some handy Imodium, too, for good measure! (Both sides! Both sides! )

Let the discomfort begin.

I just thought of another one: "First Floozy."

As I've already read in multiple places: she's the first "First Lady" we've seen naked. And it wasn't inadvertent, either, like the side boob long-distance shots the Enquirer runs of Kate Middleton in a mis-aligned bikini. She posed naked. Willingly. And got paid to do it. Modeling jobs dontchaknow.

Good Grief, that voice...

And she has what's sometimes referred to in voice-over circles as "mush-mouth." Doesn't speak clearly, runs her words together (Chris Matthews is also an offender) to where you wind up with half-words mushed together like faux "contractions". The tone and timbre of it is grating as can be. No softness to it whatsoever. It's really a rough one on the ears, I must say.

I'm no certified expert, but I did spend a quarter century on the air full-time, another several years part-time after I switched to full-time mothering, I took a long series of professional voice-over workshops while I was still working, and also sang in multiple church choirs. So that makes me feel comfortable weighing in as a voice critic. On top of that, a very close friend of mine is a professional voice-over specialist/actor/coach. Criminy! Man, do I hear a boatload of complaints about less-than-lovely voices growling and kvetching from that direction!

Small correction needed.

For those of us who are pretty damn anal-compulsive, anyway...

It's spelled "Dianne." Political Wire should correct that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein

Welcome to DU, Bengus81!

Remember how Alan Grayson cut through their bullshit.

The CONS' idea of affordable health care is -

#1: Don't get sick.

#2: If you do get sick, DIE QUICKLY.

Lapdogs, not watchdogs.

This is good stuff. Even while not likely to succeed.

STILL. It's fighting back! It's making a stand. It's taking a stand. It's saying "ENOUGH!" It's fighting in every conceivable way, from every and any angle possible. The other side sure doesn't hesitate. They find every imaginable way to screw things up and block and interfere and otherwise ruin and wreck. Why can't we do that?

Seriously. Why can't we do that?

Why do we have to be nice?

Nice gets you rolled.

Nice gets you played like a cheap violin.

I don't wanna be nice anymore.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 1183 Next »