“Conversation” used to be such a pleasant, unifying term, calling up images of reasonable people talking and listening to one another in reasonable tones – until it joined the ranks of words and phrases hijacked by the left.
I know politicians of both parties try to manipulate language. Those on the left are correct to point out that not every millionaire is a “job creator,” as implied by too many Republicans, unless we want to pretend that superstars like Miley Cyrus created the jobs for the host of assistants and bodyguards surrounding them.
But the list on the left is far longer than that on the right, and that is because they have so much more to disguise about their agenda. Why else would they use terms like “revenue enhancement” to describe a tax increase? Or, when they want to force people, under penalty of law, to pay more taxes, do they always claim that they just want to “ask the wealthy to pay a little bit more”?
It is because they know what far too many in the media and the general population apparently don’t – that those who control the terms of the debate control the debate.
Hey, if they’re only “asking” for a bit more of my money, what’s the big deal? I can always turn them down if I can’t afford it, right?
Wrong. They get to decide if you can afford it.
And this is exactly what is going on when they claim they want to have a “conversation” about anything.
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has taken to saying, “We shouldn’t be afraid to have that conversation” about his constant efforts to make government bigger and taxpayers poorer.
Attorney General Eric Holder claims to want an “honest conversation” about race. And more recently, President Obama and his supporters called yet again for a “conversation” about gun control, after Aaron Alexis, the government contractor and former Navy reservist, killed 12 people and injured eight others at the Washington Navy Yard before he was shot to death himself.