Quote:

---

Frank Luntz, arguably the GOP’s top messaging strategist, said Wednesday:

“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death. They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.” (When Luntz says he is "scared to death," he means that the Republicans who hire him are scared to death and he can profit from that fear by offering them new language. Luntz is clever.)

So just as he did with his infamous 2003 global warming warming memo – which taught conservatives how to sound like they care about the issue while opposing all action — Luntz has some key advice for Republicans on how to pretend to care about regular people while continuing to screw them over.

Amazingly, “Yahoo News sat in on the session,” where Luntz went through his spin at the Republican Governor’s Association on “How can Republicans do a better job of talking about Occupy Wall Street?”

Here are key do’s and don’ts from Luntz:

•Don’t say ‘capitalism.’ “I’m trying to get that word removed and we’re replacing it with either ‘economic freedom’ or ‘free market,’ ” Luntz said. “The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we’re seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we’ve got a problem.”

•Don’t say that the government ‘taxes the rich.’ Instead, tell them that the government ‘takes from the rich.’(Luntz reminded Republicans that Americans actually do want to tax the rich, so he reccommended they instead say that the government “takes from the rich.”)

•Republicans should forget about winning the battle over the ‘middle class.’ Call them ‘hardworking taxpayers.’(“They cannot win if the fight is on hardworking taxpayers,” Luntz instructed the audience. “We can say we defend the ‘middle class’ and the public will say, I’m not sure about that. But defending ‘hardworking taxpayers’ and Republicans have the advantage.”)

•Don’t Say Bonus (Luntz told Republicans to re-frame the concept of the bonus payment — which bailed-out Wall Street doles out to its employees during holidays — as “pay for performance” instead.

•Out: 'Entrepreneur.' In: 'Job creator.'(Use the phrases "small business owners" and "job creators" instead of "entrepreneurs" and "innovators.")

•Don't ever ask anyone to 'sacrifice.'("There isn't an American today in November of 2011 who doesn't think they've already sacrificed. If you tell them you want them to 'sacrifice,' they're going to be be pretty angry at you. You talk about how 'we're all in this together.' We either succeed together or we fail together.")

•Don’t say ‘government spending.’ Call it ‘waste.’ ("It's not about 'government spending.' It's about 'waste.' That's what makes people angry.")

•Don’t ever say you’re willing to ‘compromise.’ ("If you talk about 'compromise,' they'll say you're selling out. Your side doesn't want you to 'compromise.' What you use in that to replace it with is 'cooperation.' It means the same thing. But cooperation means you stick to your principles but still get the job done. Compromise says that you're selling out those principles.")

•The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: ‘I get it.’ (“First off, here are three words for you all: ‘I get it.’ . . . ‘I get that you’re…. I get that you’ve seen inequality. I get that you want to fix the system.” Then, he instructed, offer Republican solutions to the problem.)

•“Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”

•Always blame Washington. (Tell them, "You shouldn't be occupying Wall Street, you should be occupying Washington. You should occupy the White House because it's the policies over the past few years that have created this problem.")

George Orwell, in his famous 1946 essay, “Politics and the English Language,” wrote that

Quote:

---

“In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

---

Democrats do misuse the language and create euphemisms. All politicians do. But it is Luntz and his legion of conservative followers who have twisted the English language beyond recognition. They are the true Orwellians. The GOP parrot him as if they were reciting lessons in grammar school (see, for instance, Luntz’s memo, “The Language of Healthcare 2009,” which became the GOP playbook for attacking reform).

Is there any nonsense phrase that has been repeated to death this year more than “job creator” — in spite of the fact that for all of the wealth GOP policies have showered on the wealthy they didn’t actually create any net jobs under President Bush?

The fact that Luntz doesn’t like the word “capitalism” isn’t new. It has long been on his “Republican Playbook” list of “words never to use” along with things like “drilling for oil.” Yes, GOP parrots are instructed to say “Exploring for energy” because “drilling for oil” paints a bad picture in people’s minds of “an old-fashioned oilrig that gushes up black goop.” Go figure!

What Luntz and the conservatives figured out is that since the media are not acting as referees anymore, but mostly as play-by-play commentators or simply stenographers, politicians can say whatever they want and then do whatever they want. So, sure, say you “get it” to the Occupy crowd and then keep pushing “solutions” like tax cuts for the rich job creators, that will only worsen income inequality. http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/12/01/380121/luntz-gop-occupy-wall-
street-capitalism-is-immoral/ quotes are Luntz' own words, spoken back in December. Now you hear the buzz words every day from Republicans, FauxNews, etc., so never forget where they came from and what the intention is in using them.

For those interested in more, Frank Lutz' "Playbook" was leaked last October, and you'll find the full text at https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_2I29KBujFwNWY2MzZmZjctMjdmOS00ZGRhLW
EyY2MtMGE1MDMyYzVjYWM2/edit?pli=1 . What is it? Republican neo-conservatives have a highly sophisticated, coordinated and effective propaganda system.Their ability to stay on point and trick opponents into losing arguments is legendary. Their catchphrases and doublespeak are propaganda masterpieces. They represent the pinnacle of modern marketing science.You may have wondered: “Who on earth writes this stuff?” Where do their talking points come from? Who taught them how to manipulate the public with such skill and precision? It turns out his name is Frank Luntz, founder of the Luntz Research Companies . Since 1992 Luntz has been producing a secret playbook outlining the rhetorical strategy,updating it yearly, and disseminating to the top conservative commentators and politicians. To people such as Karl Rove,Rush Limbaugh, Bill Frist, and Sean Hannity this book is a gospel. Almost every verbal technique they use is outlined in this manual. It is responsible for every major neocon victorysince the “Republican Revolution” of 1994.This copy of the 2006 edition is the first ever leaked to the public. In it you can read the methods of linguistic realpolitik that conservative ideologues have faith fully put in play since its first publication.

You will find many, many more "Words Not To Use" in the appendix (page 132) which don't pertain to the Occupy Movement, and his text on which TO use and why NOT to use others shows you exactly what you need to know about what he's doing.

And maybe think a bit when you hear MSM reports on Occupy--WE can't control the news and we know it; all we can do is be honest about our movement, be peaceful (even if the police make it look like we're not, if the Black Bag anarchists are actually the violent ones, if police infiltrators start it or if the police themselves start it, yet it gets portrayed as us in the news), keep bringing things to the attention of the public, and eventually move on to further actions. This is a VERY long haul, we'll be around for a very long time, and if things change, it will be very slow. We know that.

The first step has already worked; we've brought a number of things into the national conversation which were pretty much ignored before. We've got the Republicans to show their hatred of us. We've helped the American people understand things they didn't before by bringing them to the fore and addressing them. Those are some of the fist steps. You may think we're naive, undisciplined, our efforts are futile, etc. Just wait; it may not happen in even my lifetime, but that's okay. We're in it for the long haul and we're not going away.

Quote:

---

What has been learned from the brain and cognitive sciences is that words are defined by fixed frames we use in thinking, frames come in hierarchical systems, and political frames are defined in moral terms, where "morality" is very different for conservatives and progressives. What lies behind the Occupy movement is moral view of democracy: Democracy is about citizens caring about each other and acting responsibly both socially and personally. This requires a robust Public empowering and protecting everyone equally. Both private success and personal freedom depend on such a Public. Every critique and proposal of the Occupy movement fits this moral view, which happens to be the progressive moral view.

What the Occupy movement can't stand is the opposite "moral" view, that Democracy provides the freedom to seek one's self-interest and ignore what is good for other Americans and others in the world. That view lies behind the Wall Street ethic of the Greedy Market, as opposed to a Market for All, a market that should maximize the well-being of most Americans. This view leads to a hierarchical view of society, where success is always deserved and lack of success is moral failure. The rich are the moral, and they not only deserve their wealth, they also deserve the power it brings. This is the view that Luntz is defending.

Referring to the rich as "hardworking taxpayers" ignores the fact that a great percentage of the rich do not get their wealth from making things, but rather from investments in other people's labor, and that most of the 1% are managers, not people who make things or directly provide services. The hardworking taxpayers are the 99%. That is not the frame that Luntz wants activated.

But Luntz is not just addressing his remarks to Republicans. He is also looking to take Democrats for suckers. How? By choosing his frames carefully, and getting Democrats to do the opposite of what he tells Republicans. There is a basic truth about framing. If you accept the other guy's frame, you lose.

Take "capitalism." It arises these days in socialist discourse, and is seen as the opposite of socialism. To attack "capitalism" in this frame is to accept "socialism." Conservatives are trying to cast Progressives, who mostly have businesses or work for businesses or are looking for good business jobs, as socialists. If you take the Luntz bait, you will be sucked into sounding like a socialist. Whatever one thinks of socialism, most Americans falsely identify it with communism, and will reject it out of hand.

Luntz would love to get Democrats using the word "tax" in the conservative sense of taking money from the pockets of hardworking folks and wasting it on people who don't deserve it. Luntz doesn't want Democrats pointing out how private success depends on public investment - in infrastructure, education, health, transportation, research, economic stability, protections of all sorts, and so on. He doesn't want progressives talking about "revenue" which is defined in a business frame to mean money needed for any institution to function and flourish. He doesn't want Democrats talking about the rich paying their fair share for the massive amount they have gotten from prior investments in a robust Public. Luntz would love to lure progressives into talking about government "spending" rather investments in education, health, and infrastructure that will benefit most Americans.

He doesn't want progressives pointing out that corporations govern our lives far more than any government does - and for their profit, not ours. He doesn't want any discussion of corporate waste, or military waste, which is huge.

Luntz would love to have Democrats talking about "entrepreneurs," which evokes a Republican view of the market as a tool for self-interest. His proposal to discuss "job creators" instead hides the fact that the business community has not been hiring despite record profits. He certainly does not want discussion of outsourcing and minimizing pay for work, which leads corporations to eliminate or downgrade jobs and hence keep wages low when profits are high.

Hidden behind his proposal to substitute "careers" for "jobs" is his attempt to appeal to young people just out of college and grad school who expect more - a profession - not just a mere "job." But of course, corporations are downgrading positions away from professional careers and more toward interchangeable McJobs requiring minimal ability and with minimal pay and benefits.

Luntz is right about not saying "sacrifice." He is right that most Americans are already hurting more than enough. They want a viable present and a future for themselves and their children and grandchildren. He is right to suggest "talking about how 'we're all in this together.' We either succeed together or we fail together." But that is the opposite of conservative morality. It is the progressive view of a moral democracy that all of Luntz's conservative framings contradict. It is an attempt at co-opting the progressive moral system, because the Occupy movement is showing that it is an idea of Democracy that makes sense to most Americans. And it is an attempt to take Obama's strongest moral appeal away from him.

Unfortunately, Luntz is still ahead of most progressives responding to him. Progressives need to learn how framing works. Bashing Luntz, bashing Fox News, bashing the right-wing pundits and leaders using their frames and arguing against their positions just keeps their frames in play.

Progressives have a basic morality, which is largely unspoken. It has to be spoken, over and over, in every corner of our country. Progressives need to be both thinking and talking about their view of a moral Democracy, about how a robust Pubic is necessary for private success, about all that the Public gives us, about the benefits of health, about a Market for All not a Greed Market, about regulation as protection, about revenue and investment, about corporations that keep wages low when profits are high, about how most of the rich earn a lot of their money without making anything or serving anyone, about how corporations govern your life for their profit not yours, about real food, about corporate and military waste, about the moral and social role of unions, about how global warming causes the increasingly monstrous effects of weather disasters, about how to save and preserve nature.

Progressives have magnificent stories of their own to tell. They need to be telling them nonstop.

Let's lure the right into using OUR frames in public discourse. http://www.alternet.org/occupywallst/153348/conservative_frank_luntz_h
as_set_a_trap_for_progressives_--_here's_how_to_outsmart_him_and_boost_the_occupy_movement/?page=2

---