Vocabulary for Communication

Dictionaries are written to provide definitive meaning to words so that correct understanding and communication can occur. It is important that what is spoken or written conveys the thought intended and is understood by the listener or reader. When to one person a certain meaning of a word or concept is different from the meaning intended, then accurate communication doesn’t happen.

Accurate transference of information is important for faithful intent properly to be conveyed. Should deceit be the purpose, then the concept of honest intent becomes unimportant.

Good family and interpersonal relationships rely on good communication. The same is true for reliable education and business connections and effective government.

The field of politics is entirely a different arena. Too often (most often?), the spoken political promises aim at making questionable objectives sound acceptable and believable in order to justify clandestine and self-aggrandizing, if not crooked, schemes. For instance, the recent Democrat candidate for President spoke of making his legislative proposals both “bi-partisan” and “transparent.” He also campaigned on reducing the national debt and concentrating on support for our winning the war in Afghanistan and “Improving the American image abroad”. He emphasized that he would not raise taxes (except on “the rich.”) and would eliminate ‘earmarks.’

Since B. Obama took office he has proceeded to exclude all Republicans from consideration of bills. He has met with his appointed czars and planned his proposed bills behind “closed doors.” As for the national debt, he and his cohorts, already in the first eleven months of office, have quadrupled the debt that existed at the beginning of his presidency.  The massive spending programs and debt can only be addressed with huge tax increases on all levels of society and for generations to come. Over five thousand ear marks were attached to the first “stimulus” bill he signed. He “dithered” for four months on a request from his own appointed General Stanley McChrystal for forty thousand troops to wage the war in Afghanistan successfully. These actions alone indicate the intent of the subterfuge of the words of the number one politician now in Washington.

The heap of intended assertions of what B.O. planned to “change,” if elected, are numerous, and because the previous majority of GOP members had strayed from their conservative promises, a voting majority of people voted for that ‘change.’ Too few citizens bothered seriously to attribute the signs of the socialist ideology to Barack O, since he sounded so “centrist.” The aspects of governmental central control are so egregious that they must be described in terms of acceptable free-enterprise-type terms in order to make them sound desirable. It is possible that after all the evasive speech that Obama has used he might insert an important statement of fact; then, like the little boy who cried “wolf,” it will be too late to believe him.

Let there be no misunderstanding of the central core of the socialist philosophy. It is suppression of the individual to the state and control of all aspects of people’s lives and business. It must therefore, suppress and destroy the strengths of individuals’ religion and morals, suppress the composite of the citizens’ control of government, and destroy the concept of capitalism.

Anti-capitalism is world-wide in socialist countries. As an example of world-wide anti-capitalism, Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez at the recent Copenhagen Climate Conference railed against the “silent and terrible ghost” of capitalism. He said, “Capitalism is a destructive model that is eradicating life, that threatens to put a definitive end to the human species.” So much for a despot trying to destroy a positive concept to further his own despicable purposes!

Not enough is being openly discussed on the proposed health bill’s items that countermand the Constitution. Two pages of them were recently enumerated by a constitutional attorney who read the over-two-thousand pages of it. These items have nothing to do with health care but are inserted into the bill in order to control the private lives and dealings of citizens.

Sadly, the present vigorous effort to proceed with the present bill to “reform” the present health system is shown by polls to be opposed by over 61 per cent of the American people. Yet it is being pursued by the Democrat leaders and majority in government because they want it. What happened to representative government?

The obtrusive blatancy of this full-court press to pass the Democrat-planned control is astounding. It should disturb our whole people as much as it does me and those like me who want to retain our individuality, personal property, and liberty.

David L. Wood, M.D., Long Beach, CA, December 19, 2009.